Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016  with  funding  from 
Getty  Research  Institute 


https://archive.org/details/manetOOunse 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


WINSOR  & NEWTON,  Limited 

LONDON  BRANCH  OFFICE  AND  SALESROOMS,  298  BROADWAY,  NEW  YORK  CITY 


< “ Q 
§ K « 
!>  H < 

g M 2 

< < ^ 
J CO  to 
O oi 

“ o W 

^ d Q 
H O j 
to  O 


o: 


H ft!  o 
0!  U ^ 
< t-  ? 


<j= 


j=t/i 

S'g 

S CS 

_ c 

^ rt 

< s 


ft! 

W 

ft, 

< 

ft. 

O 

z 

2 Q 
u ft! 
H < 

u o 

ft!  m 

2 2 
O < 


M 

axO 

oO  be 
0.^  g 
- <D  P 

>_'9 

qjO  c: 

S'Sl’s 

<i!2QO 


£"> 


m M 

U C M 
0>^  B 
O ^Q? 

S " W 

™ C3  ^ 


a.lif 


^ o 
c In  c 

HH  4) 

.5  B he 

g 2 " I 
pqQ2  2 
n 

.2  o ^ .*3 
43  b’O  V 
w c 5j 
^ S?  B 5 

<M  V Q, 

■tJ'M  c 
^•2.5  O 
S?0,2 


<n 

^§1  ^ 

st'.Ss  ^ 

,3 


0) 


Bei 
"-1^  w 


Chi 
rt  , -O 

So  = 

M-i  ™ 

X • C/I 

o3 


CO 


'-'  be 
Qi  ^ 
O fi 

>‘rt 

•-•CL, 


O CO 
2 


o ,2 


i)  0)  4> 


U O 

i^  = =3 

o-o  ° P 

u 3.S  U 

3 2 a ^ 
0-0  -K  ** 

W-S-o 
■M  o 2 

frt  ^ B 
£ W+-  w 


3 W 
«8 


o 

a 

£0 
B 1) 

o 2 
■gl 


MASTERS  IN  MUSIC 


“The  Aristocrat  of  Musical  Publications” 


“ Happily  conceived  and 
finely  executed.”  — Musi- 
cal Record  and  Remew. 

“Only  words  of  praise 
are  required  to  describe 
it.” — The  Presto. 

Six  Volumes 

Full  green  cloth,  beveled 
boards,  gold  back  stamp. 
§15.00,  express  paid. 


“ Without  exception  the 
finest  publication  of  the 
kind  that  has  ever  come  to 
our  notice.” — Cadenza. 

“A  .superb  musical  li- 
brary. ” — Rochester  Herald. 

Terms 

.§3. 00  with  order  and  bal- 
ance in  six  monthly  pay- 
ments of  12.00  each. 


List  of  subjects  and  full  information  on  request 


BATES  & GUILD  CO.,  Boston,  Mass. 


THE  UNIVERSITY  PRINTS 


Are  the  only  reproductions 
published  in  inexpensive 
form  for  the  systematic  study 
of  Greek  and  Italian  Art. 
One  cent  each,  or  eighty 
cents  per  hundred.  Catalog 
on  request. 

Publishing  Department 
BUREAU  OF 
UNIVERSITY  TRAVEL 
1 8 Trinity  Place 
Boston,  Mass. 


HIGGINS’ 


Drawing-Inks 
Eternal  Writing-Ink 
Engrossing-Ink 
Taurine  Mucilage 
Photo-Mounter  Paste 
Drawing-Board  Paste 
Liquid  Paste 
Office  Paste 
Vegetable  Glue,  Etc. 


Are  the  Finest  and  tResl  Inks  and  Adhesives 
Emancipate  yourself  from  the  use  of  corrosive  and 
ill-smelling  inks  and  adhesives  and  adopt  the  Hig. 
gins  Inks  and  A dhesives.  They  will  be  a reve- 
lation to  you.  they  are  so  sweet,  clean,  and  well 
put  up.  At  T)ealers  Generally. 

CHAS.  M.  HIGGINS  & CO.,  Mfrs. 

Branches  : Chicago,  London 

271  ninth  Street  Brooklyn,  If.  T. 


In  answering  advertisements,  please  mention  Masters  in  Art 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


Among  the  artists  to  whom  numbers  will  be  devoted  during  1 908  are  Sir  Frederick 
Leighton^  Nicholas  Maes,  El  Greco,  Bordone,  Crivelli,  and  probably  Hokusai. 

PART  99,  THE  ISSUE  FOR 

fcfiruarp,  1908 

WILL  TREAT  OF 


Carlo  CrilJclU 


NUMBERS  ISSUED  IN  PREVIOUS  VOLUMES  OF  ‘MASTERS  IN  ART’ 


Part  1. 
Part  2. 
Part  3. 
Part  4. 
Part  5. 
Part  6. 
Part  7. 
Part  8. 
Part  9. 
Part  10. 
Part  11. 
Part  12. 


VOL.  1. 

VAN  DYCK 

TITIAN 

VELASQUEZ 

HOLBEIN 

BOTTICELLI 

REMBRANDT 

REYNOLDS 

MILLET 

GIOV.  BELLINI 

MURILLO 

FRANS  HALS 

RAPHAEL 


VOL.  4o 

Part  37.  ROMNEY 

Part  38.  FRA  ANGELICO 

Part  39.  WATTE.aU 

Part  40.  RAPHAEL'S  FRESCOS 

Part  41.  DONATELLO 

Part  42.  GERARD  DOU 

Part  43.  CARPACCIO 

Part  44.  ROSA  BONHEUR 

PART  45.  GUIDO  RENI 

Part  46.  PUVIS  DE  CHAVANNES 

Part  47.  GIORGIONE 

Part  48.  ROSSETTI 


VOL.  2. 

Part  13.  RUBENS 
Part  14.  DA  VINCI 
Part  15.  DURER 

Part  16.  MICHELANGELO  {Sculpture) 

Part  17.  MICHELANGELO  {Painting) 

Part  18.  COROT 

Part  19.  BURNE-JONES 

Part  20.  TER  BORCH 

Part  21.  DELLA  ROBBIA 

Part  22.  DEL  SARTO 

Part  23.  GAINSBOROUGH 

Part  24.  CORREGGIO 

VOL.  5. 

Part  49.  FRA  BARTOLOMMEO 

Part  50.  GREUZE 

Part  61.  DURER’S  ENGRAVINGS 

Part  52.  LOTTO 

Part  53.  LANDSEER 

Part  54.  VERMEER  OF  DELFT 

Part  66.  PINTORICCHIO 

Part  56.  THE  VAN  EYCKS 

Part  57.  MEISSONIER 

Part  58.  BARYE 

Part  59.  VERONESE 

Part  60.  COPLEY 


VOL.  3. 

Part  25.  PHIDIAS 

Part  26.  PERUGINO 

Part  27.  HOLBEIN'S  DRAWINGS 

Part  2S'.  TINTORETTO 

Part  29.  PIETER  DE  HOOCH 

Part  30.  NATTIER 

Part  31.  PAUL  POTTER 

Part  32.  GIOTTO 

PART  33.  PRAXITELES 

Part  34.  HOGARTH 

Part  35.  TURNER 

Part  36.  LUINI 


VOL.  6. 

Part  61.  WATTS 

Part  62.  PALMA  VECCHIO 

Part  63.  MADAME  VIGEE  LB  BRDN 

Part  64.  MANTEGNA 

Part  65.  CHARDIN 

Part  66.  BENOZZO  GOZZOLl 

Part  67.  JAN  STEEN 

Part  68.  MEMLINC 

Part  69.  CLAUDE  LORRAIN 

Part  70.  VERROCCHIO 

Part  71.  RAEBURN 

Part  72.  FRA  FILIPPO  LIPPI 


VOL.  7. 


VOL.  8. 


Part  73. 
Part  74. 
Part  75. 
Part  76. 
Part  77. 
Part  78. 
Part  79. 
Part  80. 
Part  81. 
Part  82. 
Part  83. 
Part  84. 


JANUARY 

STUART 

Part  85. 

JANUARY 

LAWEENCE 

FEBRUARY 

. DAVID 

Part  86. 

FEBRUARY  . 

. VAN  RUISDAEL 

MARCH 

. BOCKLIN 

Part  87. 

MARCH  . 

FILIPPINO  LIPPI 

APRIL 

SODOMA 

Part  88. 

APRIL 

LA  TOUR 

MAY  . 

CONSTABLE 

Part  89. 

MAY 

SIGNORELLI 

JUNE 

METSU 

Part  90. 

JUNE 

. MASACCIO 

JULY 

INGRES 

Part  91. 

JULY 

TENIERS 

AUGUST  . 

WILKIE 

Part  92. 

AUGUST  . 

TIEPOLO 

SEPTEMBER  . 

. GHIRLANDAJO 

Part  93. 

SEPTEMBER  . 

DELACROIX 

OCTOBER 

. BOUGUEREAU 

Part  94. 

OCTOBER 

. JULES  BRETON 

NOVEMBER 

. GOYA 

Part  95. 

NOVEMBER  . 

. ROUSSEAU 

DECEMBER 

. FRANCIA 

Part  96. 

DECEMBER  . 

. WHISTLER 

ALL  THE  ABOVE  NAMED  ISSUES  ARE  IN  STOCK 

with  the  exception  of  Parts  8,  12,  27,  28,  and  35,  and  can  be  immediately  delivered.  The  above  five  parts 
are  temporarily  out  of  stock,  but  are  being  reprinted. 

Prices  on  and  after  January  1,  1908 : Single  numbers  of  back  volumes,  20  cents  each.  Single  numbers 
of  the  current,  1908,  volume,  15  cents  each.  Bound  volumes  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7,  and  8,  containing  the 
parts  listed  above,  bound  in  brown  buckram,  with  gUt  stamps  and  gilt  top,  $3.75  each  ; in  green  half- 
morocco, gilt  stamps  and  gilt  top,  $4.25  each.  Postage  to  Canada,  25  cents  additional  per  12  numbers 


In  answering  advertisements,  please  mention  Masters  in  Art 


t 


FRENCH  SCHOOL 


Ni 


M ^ : o ^ 1 


K 


K*’ 

j ■'  ■' 


vy 


" ' -i 


MASTERS  IN  ART  PLATE  I 

RErRODUCEO  BY  PERMISSION 

[a] 


MANET 

BOY  WITH  THE  SWORD 

PROPERTY  OF  THE  METROPOLITAN  MUSEUM  OF  ART,  NEW  YORK 


- V* 


MASTERS  IX  ART  PLATE  II 

PH  BY  OURANO-RUEL 

[5] 


PHOTOORAI 


MANET 
GOOD  DOCK 

COLLECTION  OF  U.  O.  HAVEMETEH,  NEW  XORK 


MASTZHS  JN  ART 


RliATE  III 


[7] 


PHOTOGRAPH 


MANET 

JEANNE 

COLLECTION  OF  M.  FAUHE,  PARIS 


MASTERS  IX  ART 


PLATE  TV 


PHOTOGRA(>H  BY  GIRAUOON 

[9] 


MAXET 

THi:  JLVI>CONT 
LOUVRE,  PARIS 


MASTKRS  IX  ART  PLATE  V 


REPRODUCED  BY  PERMISSION 

[ll] 


maxf:t 

WOMAN  WITH  THE  PARROT 

PROPERTT  OF  THE  METKOPOI.ITAN  MUSEUM  OF  ART,  NEW  YORK 


MASTERS  IX  ART  PLATE  VI 


PHOTOGRAPH  8Y  GIRAUOOH 

[ t-3] 


MANET 

REST 

COLLECTION  OF  M.  G.  VANDERBILT,  NEW  YORK 


MASTERS  Ilf  AMT  PLATE  VII 

PHOTOGRAPH  BY  OURANO-ftUEL 

C15] 


MANET 

PORTRAIT  OF  HENRI  ROCHEFORT 
COLLECTION  OF  M.  FAURE,  PARIS 


IN  THF  GARDEN 

COLLECTION  OF  H.  O.  HAVEMEYER,  NEW  YORK 


X 


Sf'., .-r-r 


■/ 


t >,i 


'.1  -Si 


A 


:"v'  - f'OT  ' ’ 

.:.  J'XXv 


f"'  J''<‘  ,5 

■/-''i'  '■Xr 


Y,' 

• 'i 


t' 


/ 


M-ASTEBS  IN  ART  PLATE  IX 


POHTBAIT  OF  MANET  BT  HIMSELF 
BELONGS  TO  M.  AUGUSTE  PELLEHIN,  PAHIS 
This  portrait  of  Manet,  known  as  that  ‘ With  the  Palette,’  was  painted  in  1878. 
It  shows  him  as  a fair-complexioned  man  with  keen  blue  eyes,  and  light  hair  and 
beard.  He  wears  a light  brown  coat,  dark  necktie,  and  soft  felt  hat,  relieved 
against  an  olive-green  background.  Many  of  Manet’s  characteristics  of  technique 
are  visible  here  : the  broad  brush-strokes,  the  absence  of  much  modeling  in  the  face, 
and  of  practically  no  modeling  at  all  in  the  hand  holding  the  paint-brush. 

[22] 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


ii^tvouartif 

BORN  18  3 2:  DIED  1883 
FRENCH  SCHOOL 

Edouard  MANET  (pronounced  Ma'nS)  has  been  called  the  “Father 
of  Impressionism.”  The  eldest  of  three  sons,  he  was  born  on  the  twenty- 
third  of  January,  1832,  in  a house  directly  opposite  the  present  Ecole  des 
Beaux-Arts,  on  the  street  formerly  called  rue  des  Petits-Augustins,  to-day 
rue  Bonaparte,  and  he  was  baptized  in  the  neighboring  church  of  St.  Germain- 
des-Pres.  His  mother  belonged  to  the  rich  old  bourgeoisie  class;  his  father, 
to  the  bourgeoisie  which  flourished  under  Louis  Philippe,  and  held  the  office 
of  judge  of  the  tribunal  of  the  Seine.  As  the  family  for  generations  had  been 
connected  with  the  magistracy,  Edouard  was  destined  by  his  father  for  the 
law  and  was  educated  at  College  Rollin  with  that  in  view.  His  maternal 
uncle.  Colonel  Fournier,  however,  was  wont  to  amuse  himself  in  his  leisure 
hours  with  drawing,  and  it  was  through  visits  to  him  that  the  boy  Edouard 
discovered  his  own  taste  for  art,  and  at  sixteen  announced  to  his  family  his 
desire  to  follow  the  career  of  an  artist.  His  parents,  with  their  old  family 
traditions,  were  filled  with  despair.  A compromise  was  made  and  their  son 
sent  on  a voyage  on  a trading-ship,  ‘La  Gaudeloupe,’  from  Havre  to  Rio  de 
Janeiro.  The  voyage  was  for  the  most  part  uneventful,  but  gave  the  young 
man  an  idea  of  the  grandeur  of  the  sea  that  he  never  forgot.  In  after-years 
he  loved  to  recount  that  his  first  attempt  with  the  paint-brush  was  in  touching 
up  some  Dutch  cheeses  of  which  the  cargo  consisted  and  which  had  become 
discolored  with  the  sea-water. 

When  on  his  return  from  Brazil  his  parents  found  him  as  determined  as 
ever  in  his  desire  to  be  an  artist,  they  resigned  themselves  to  the  inevitable, 
and  he  was  placed,  about  the  year  1850,  in  the  studio  of  Thomas  Couture,  a 
painter  noted  in  his  day  for  his  paintings  of  historical  subjects,  among  them 
the  ‘Romans  of  the  Decadence,’  now  in  the  Louvre.  The  pupil  remained  six 
years  studying  here,  but  finally  left  in  open  revolt  against  his  master,  quite 
disgusted  with  the  historical  subject  and  the  eternal  study  of  the  nude  in  the 
conventional,  classic  poses  of  the  professional  models.  He  continued  to 
study  by  himself,  travelled  extensively  in  Holland,  where  he  was  much  im- 
pressed by  the  portraits  by  Franz  Hals,  in  Germany,  and  in  Italy,  where  the 
work  of  Tintoretto  of  all  the  Italian  artists  most  influenced  him.  And  of  this 

[23] 


24 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


influence  we  see  the  effect  a little  later  in  a couple  of  religious  subjects  that 
Manet  painted  during  those  first  tentative  years  when  he  was  searching  for 
the  path  he  wished  to  follow. 

His  original  work  began  in  his  attempts  to  depict  the  life  of  the  people  in 
the  streets,  one  of  his  first  canvases  being  ‘The  Boy  with  the  Cherries,’  a 
street  gamin  leaning  over  a wall,  with  a red  cap  on  his  head,  and  holding  a 
bunch  of  cherries,  which  is  said  to  suggest  Adrian  Brouwer  in  its  style.  The 
same  year,  1859,  painted  ‘The  Absinthe  Drinker,’  which  was  refused  at 
the  Salon.  Though  characteristic  of  Manet,  it  still  recalls  work  done  in 
Couture’s  studio.  In  1861  he  sent  to  the  Salon  a ‘Spanish  Singer’  and  a 
double  portrait  of  his  father  and  mother.  For  this  he  received  honorable 
mention  simply  because,  writes  Muther,  it  was  painted  in  the  old  Bolognese 
style  with  brown  shadows.  It  was  the  last  and  only  time  until  the  year  before 
his  death  that  he  received  any  honors  from  the  Salon.  M.  Duret,  his  biog- 
rapher, points  out  that  in  the  basket  his  mother  holds,  filled  with  balls  of 
variegated  wools,  we  see  that  taste  of  his  for  painting  still  life  which  he  de- 
veloped so  strongly  in  his  later  years.  To  these  early  years  belongs  the  ‘Music 
at  the  Tuileries,’  ‘The  Street  Singer’  (a  picture  now  in  a private  collection  in 
Boston),  a woman  who  stands  holding  her  guitar  under  her  arm  and  eating  a 
bunch  of  cherries.  “The  ensemble  would  remain  vulgar,”  writes  M.  Duret, 
“but  the  artist  has  known  how  to  embellish  it  by  the  quality  in  the  painting 
itself.” 

But  another  influence  was  to  come  into  Manet’s  art,  that  of  Velasquez. 
This  artist  had  been  little  known  and  understood  outside  Madrid  until  the 
Exposition  held  at  Manchester  in  1857  made  the  English  acquainted  with 
him.  In  the  early  sixties  the  French  discovered  his  great  qualities  and  Manet 
became  an  ardent  admirer  and  his  first  disciple  amongst  the  artists  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  This  study  of  Velasquez  set  the  artist  free  from  the  old 
style  of  the  so-called  “brown  sauce”  of  the  Bolognese,  and  he  passed  through, 
writes  Muther,  much  the  same  development  in  the  problem  of  painting  light 
as  did  Velasquez  himself,  who  began  in  the  ‘Bacchus’  by  representing  an 
open-air  scene  with  the  play  of  light  of  a closed  room,  but  later  placed  his 
figures  in  the  ambient  atmosphere  of  the  outer  world.  Manet  painted  several 
figures  against  a pearl-gray  background,  ‘The  Fifer,’  ‘The  Guitar- Player,’ 
and  ‘The  Bull-Fighter’  wounded  to  death,  in  which  he  shows  his  discipleship, 
but  more  particularly  in  the  ‘Boy  with  the  Sword’  (plate  i),  which  Muther 
says  might  have  been  signed  by  the  great  Spaniard  himself.  These  and  a 
number  of  other  Spanish  subjects  were  suggested  to  him  by  a visit  to  Paris  of 
a Spanish  troupe  of  dancers.  His  trip  to  Madrid  to  study  the  pictures  of 
Velasquez  and  Goya  did  not  occur  until  1865. 

But  Manet  may  be  said,  like  Whistler,  to  have  made  his  real  debut  at  the 
Salon  of  1863,  with  the  ‘Dejeuner  sur  I’Herbe,’  called  in  English  either  ‘The 
Breakfast’  or  ‘The  Picnic.’  In  this  picture  he  represented  sitting  on  the  green- 
sward under  the  trees  two  young  men  in  artists’  costume,  and  a nude  female 
figure,  while  another  clothed  only  in  her  chemise  is  splashing  in  the  brook 
in  the  background.  Although  there  was  precedent  for  such  a scene  in  pic- 

124] 


MANET 


25 


tures  of  a similar  character  in  the  Louvre  by  Titian  and  Giorgione,  not  un- 
naturally the  public  was  shocked,  and  the  picture  was  refused  but  hung  in 
the  ‘Salon  des  Refuses’  alongside  of  pictures  by  Bracquemond,  Legros, 
Harpignies,  and  Whistler.  With  Manet  this  was  merely  a pictorial  experiment, 
a testing  of  the  effect  of  light  in  the  open  air  on  clothed  and  nude  figures.  But 
it  has  been  said  that  though  on  the  right  track,  even  yet  he  was  not  altogether 
successful;  that  his  sky  was  without  atmosphere  and  his  sunbeams  hard  and 
opaque.  In  the  ‘Dejeuner  sur  I’herbe’  Manet  found  himself,  so  M.  Duret 
writes.  The  picture  was  sent  to  the  Salon  under  the  title  of  ‘The  Bath,’ 
though  the  other  title  has  prevailed.  By  its  large  dimensions  alone  it  neces- 
sarily attracted  attention.  One  critic  remarks  that  the  landscape  is  treated 
much  as  a tapestry  background,  and  all  agree  that  the  still-life  painting  in 
the  articles  for  the  breakfast  is  wonderfully  well  done. 

In  1863  Manet  married  Mile.  Suzanne  Leenhoff,  a Dutchwoman,  of 
a family  of  great  artistic  gifts,  and  herself  a fine  pianist.  His  father  had  died 
in  1862,  leaving  a fortune  to  be  divided  between  his  three  sons.  The  artist 
then  had  no  necessity  for  selling  his  pictures,  but  could  develop  his  art  as 
he  chose,  confident  of  the  sympathy  of  his  wife,  with  whom  at  this  time  he 
came  to  live  in  his  mother’s  house  in  rue  de  Saint-Petersburg.  The  house  was 
said  to  have  been  furnished  in  the  frigid  style  which  was  the  fashion  under 
Louis  Philippe,  and  bore  no  more  evidences  than  did  Manet’s  personal  ap- 
pearance of  the  artist.  On  the  contrary,  he  had  the  airs  and  breeding  of  a 
thorough  man  of  the  world.  “From  one  point  of  view  1863  was  disastrous; 
from  another,  triumphant.  Hitherto  a man  of  promise,  Manet  now  developed 
into  a man  of  notoriety.” 

To  the  Salon  of  1864  Manet  sent  two  canvases,  ‘The  Angels  at  the  Tomb 
of  Christ’  and  ‘An  Episode  in  a Bull-fight,’  which  were  received.  The  former 
has  little  religious  feeling,  but  as  a piece  of  painting  it  has  been  called  the  best 
religious  picture  of  the  nineteenth  century.  In  1865  he  sent  ‘Jesus  insulted 
by  the  Soldiers’  and  ‘Olympia’  (plate  ix),  painted,  however,  in  1863,  as  a 
sort  of  complement  to  the  ‘ Picnic.’  These  were  accepted,  the  jury  being  some- 
what less  severe  since  the  Emperor  two  years  before  had  inaugurated  the 
‘Salon  des  Refuses,’  although  “the  unusual  traits  which  they  (the  public) 
had  first  contemplated  with  horror  in  the  ‘Dejeuner  sur  I’herbe,’”  writes 
M.  Duret,  “they  found  accentuated  in  ‘Olympia.’”  The  author  of  this  pic- 
ture became  an  object  of  curiosity  throughout  Paris,  and  to  escape  persecu- 
tions made  his  often-projected  trip  to  Madrid. 

In  1861  Manet  sent  ‘The  Fifer’  and  ‘The  Tragic  Actor’  to  the  Salon,  but 
they  were  refused,  no  doubt  because  of  the  indignation  raised  against  him  the 
preceding  year.  A much  greater  disappointment  to  the  young  artist  was  the 
refusal  of  the  jury  at  the  Universal  Exposition  in  1867  to  hang  any  of  his  pic- 
tures, so  that,  as  he  had  done  once  already  at  Martinet’s  in  1863,  he  was  forced 
to  hold  a special  exhibition  of  his  work.  Like  Rodin  in  1900,  he  obtained 
permission,  with  Courbet,  whose  pictures  also  had  been  refused,  to  erect  a 
wooden  exhibition-hall  near  the  Pont  d’Alma.  It  was  too  soon  for  the  public 
who  came  to  see  his  pictures  to  show  anything  but  scorn  and  contempt  for 

[25] 


26 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


his  work.  They  saw  absolutely  no  beauty  in  it.  In  the  catalogue  was  written, 
“The  artist  does  not  say  to  you  to-day,  ‘Come  and  see  flawless  works;’  he 
says,  ‘Come  and  see  sincere  works.’”  Two  years  later  the  jury  of  the  Salon 
accepted  the  ‘Portrait  of  Emile  Zola’  and  ‘A  Young  Woman,’  which  became 
known  later  under  the  title  of  the  ‘Woman  with  the  Parrot’  (plate  v).  In 
the  same  year  he  painted  ‘The  Execution  of  the  Emperor  Maximilian,’  unique 
from  his  hand  as  an  historical  subject.  It  is  the  only  thing  he  ever  painted 
from  imagination,  without  having  actually  witnessed  the  scene  enacted  be- 
fore his  eyes  and  at  least  holding  it  in  remembrance. 

Delacroix,  who  had  been  one  of  the  jury  of  the  Salon  in  1859,  had  seen 
promise  in  the  young  artist’s  work,  and  even  Ingres  is  said  to  have  approved 
of  it.  But  Baudelaire  was  almost  the  only  critic  who  praised  Manet,  and 
dedicated  verses  to  ‘Lola  de  Valence,’  the  Spanish  dancer,  in  his  ‘Eleurs  du 
Mai.’  M.  Emile  Zola,  however,  from  the  first,  was  enthusiastic  over  Manet, 
and  wrote  such  eulogistic  praises  of  him,  as  art  critic  in  1866  of  the  ‘Figaro,’ 
then  published  under  the  name  of  ‘Evenement,’  that  he  caused  a great  falling 
off  in  the  subscription-list,  and  owing  to  his  unwillingness  to  retract  was  forced 
to  resign  from  his  position.  The  same  year  that  Manet’s  ‘Olympia’  made 
such  a commotion,  Monet,  eight  years  his  junior,  exhibited  at  the  Salon  for 
the  first  time  two  marines.  Manet  discovered  the  other’s  signature  and 
thinking  it  a sort  of  plagiarism  exclaimed,  “Who  is  this  Monet  who  has  the 
air  of  taking  my  name  and  who  is  coming  thus  to  profit  by  the  noise  which  I 
have  made  ?”  It  is  said  that  henceforth  the  younger  artist  was  most  careful 
to  sign  his  full  name,  Claude  Monet,  to  avoid  all  confusion,  though  it  was  not 
till  the  next  year  that  the  two  artists  became  acquainted  with  one  another 
and  thereafter  firm  friends. 

Manet,  the  object  of  ridicule  as  far  as  the  public  was  concerned,  was  sur- 
rounded by  a devoted  circle  of  young  artists.  They  were  accustomed  to  meet 
on  Friday  evenings  at  the  Cafe  Guerbois  at  the  beginning  of  the  Avenue 
de  Clichy  in  Batignolles,  then  a suburb  of  Paris.  Hence  arose  the  term  ‘Ecole 
des  Batignolles.’  Here  came  regularly  Legros,  Whistler,  Fantin-Latour, 
Duranty,  Degas,  Renoir,  Pissarro,  Sisley,  Monet,  Gauguin,  Zandomeneghi, 
Astruc,  Zola,  and  Bazille,  who  met  his  death  prematurely  in  one  of  the  con- 
flicts with  the  Prussians  in  1870,  and  occasionally  came  Burty,  Proust,  Henner, 
and  Stevens.  To  the  Salon  of  1870  Fantin-Latour  sent  a picture  entitled  ‘A 
Studio  in  Batignolles,’  which  showed  Manet  seated  at  an  easel  surrounded 
by  such  of  these  men  who  had  come  most  directly  under  his  influence,  and 
came  later  to  be  called  ‘Impressionists.’  This  picture  had  the  semblance  of 
an  actual  scene,  but  was  not  so  in  fact,  but  was  conceived  in  the  same  spirit 
as  the  artist’s  earlier  picture,  ‘Homage  to  Delacroix.’ 

To  the  Salon  of  1869  Manet  sent  ‘The  Balcony’  (plate  iv),  another  can- 
vas of  which  he  had  great  hopes,  but  which  met  only  with  laughter  and  ridi- 
cule. Finally,  in  1870,  when  he  was  visiting  the  artist  De  Nittis  in  the  environs 
of  Paris,  he  set  up  his  easel  in  his  friend’s  garden,  posed  his  wife  in  the  open 
air  under  the  trees,  her  baby  in  its  cradle  on  one  side  of  her,  her  husband  on 
the  grass  on  the  other  (plate  Viil),  and  from  this  time  forth  devoted  himself  to 

[26] 


MANET 


27 


‘plein  air’  painting,  and  became  the  painter  of  light  that  we  always  think  of 
when  we  think  of  Manet.  Then  broke  out  the  war  with  Prussia.  Manet  en- 
listed in  a volunteer  company  composed  chiefly  of  artists  and  literary  men,  but 
was  soon  made  an  officer  in  the  Garde  Nationale  under  Meissonier  as  colonel. 

The  year  1870,  then,  marks  a turning-point  in  the  artist’s  method  of  paint- 
ing. By  1871  the  friends  and  followers  of  Manet,  known  as  the  ‘Ecole  des 
Batignolles,’  were  fully  developed  in  their  method  of  painting  in  the  open  air; 
in  fact,  Monet,  though  the  junior  of  Manet,  had  somewhat  earlier  begun  to 
paint  in  this  way.  They  now  determined  to  hold  an  exposition  of  their  works 
at  Nadar’s  Gallery,  Boulevard  des  Capucins.  Some  years  before,  in  1863, 
Monet  had  exhibited  a sunset  under  the  title  ‘An  Impression.’  At  this  ex- 
hibition were  titles  such  as  ‘Impressions  of  my  Pot  on  the  Fire,’  ‘Impressions 
of  a Cat  Walking.’  M.  Claretie,  the  critic,  in  writing  of  this  exhibition,  called 
it  the  ‘Salon  of  the  Impressionists.’  Hence  arose  the  name  which  attached 
itself  to  these  artists,  whose  chief  aim  and  object  was  the  study  of  light  and 
might  better,  Caffin  suggests,  be  called  ‘ Luminarists.’  They  believed  that 
the  first  requisite  of  the  painter  was  to  be  able  to  paint,  and  the  subject  was 
of  secondary  importance,  contrary  to  all  the  teachings  of  Mr.  Ruskin.  They 
juxtaposed  pure  colors  on  the  canvas  instead  of  mixing  them  on  the  palette, 
relying  upon  the  eye  to  fuse  them  into  an  harmonious  whole.  Manet’s  method 
was  to  place  his  colors  in  broad  brush-strokes  rather  than  in  spots,  though  he 
was  always  looked  upon  as  the  leader  of  the  group. 

In  1872  M.  Durand-Ruel,  who  had  already  bought  a picture  of  still  life 
and  a marine,  now  bought  twenty-eight  more  of  Manet’s  canvases,  paying 
thirty-eight  thousand  six  hundred  francs.  The  same  year  the  artist  exhibited 
the  ‘Combat  of  the  Kearsage  and  the  Alabama,’  a striking  picture  of  a 
scene  he  had  actually  witnessed  from  a pilot-boat  and  which  took  place  off 
Cherbourg.  The  year  following  he  exhibited  ‘Rest’  (plate  vi)  and  ‘Good 
Bock’  (plate  ii).  The  latter  was  perhaps  the  only  popular  picture  that  Manet 
ever  painted  and  was  well  received  by  the  critics  and  journalists  on  ‘Varnish- 
ing Day’  and  the  public  on  the  following  days,  while  the  former,  however,  was 
treated  with  the  customary  ridicule.  A little  after,  he  painted  the  ‘ Ball  at  the 
Opera,’  a canvas  of  small  dimensions  but  masterfully  handled,  the  men  in 
black  clothes,  the  women  for  the  most  part  in  black  dominoes.  To  tbe  Salon 
of  1874  he  sent  ‘The  Railway’  (plate  x)  and  ‘ Polichinelle.’  The  former,  a 
large  picture  and  a conspicuous  example  of  ‘plein  air’  painting,  attracted 
much  attention  and  incurred  much  disfavor. 

In  1875  Manet  posed  his  brother-in-law  and  a woman  friend  in  the  stern 
of  a boat  at  Argenteuil,  with  the  banks  of  the  river  and  some  of  the  Seine 
barges  upon  the  horizon,  against  the  deep  blue  background  of  the  sky.  With 
this  most  original  work  he  hoped  to  make  a brilliant  hit,  but  it  was  received 
with  derision  as  the  ‘Picnic’  and  the  ‘Olympia’  had  been.  The  public  had  at 
last  come  to  tolerate  his  pure  tones  juxtaposed,  but  in  this  case  his  method 
was  too  extreme  to  be  received  lightly.  The  next  year,  1876,  the  jury  refused 
‘The  Linen’  and  ‘The  Artist,’  so  he  determined  to  hold  a special  exhibition 
of  his  work,  and  the  press  this  time  took  his  part  against  the  jury  of  the  Salon 

[27] 


28 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


in  refusing  the  work  of  a man  so  diligent  and  so  earnest.  Two  years  later  he 
sent  in  for  exhibition  ‘Nana,’  a young  woman  at  her  toilette-table  carelessly 
conversing  with  a man  behind  her,  which  was  refused  at  the  Salon,  and  also 
the  ‘Portrait  of  M.  Faure  in  the  role  of  Hamlet,’  the  renowned  baritone  at  the 
opera  and  the  owner  of  thirty-five  canvases  by  Manet.  In  1878  he  was  again 
refused  at  the  Universal  Exposition,  as  he  had  been  in  1867.  He  at  first 
thought  to  hold  another  special  exhibition  of  his  work,  but  abandoned  the 
idea,  as  his  work  was  so  well  known  and  the  plan  was  too  expensive  for  his 
now  somewhat  straitened  means.  In  1879  he  sent  to  the  Salon  ‘Boating’  and 
‘In  the  Conservatory;’  in  1880,  ‘At  Pere  Lathuille’s’  and  ‘Portrait  of  M. 
Antonin  Proust;’  in  1881,  ‘Portrait  of  M.  Pertuiset,  the  Lion-hunter’  and 
‘Portrait  of  M.  Rochefort’  (plate  vii),  in  each  year  the  first  painted  in  the 
open  air,  the  second  in  his  studio.  A lion-hunt  being  something  he  had  never 
seen,  he  did  not  attempt  to  depict;  so  instead  of  placing  M.  Pertuiset  in  a 
forest  in  Algiers,  he  poses  him  under  the  trees  in  the  Elysee  des  Beaux-Arts, 
resting  on  one  knee  with  a gun  in  his  hand,  and  in  the  middle  distance  a lion- 
skin,  as  a note  of  contrasting  color  against  the  uniform  tones  of  the  earth. 
As  usual,  the  public,  mistaking  the  artist’s  intention,  had  nothing  but  con- 
tempt to  show. 

Though  these  pictures  of  1881  were  neither  better  nor  worse  than  many  of 
his  preceding  pictures,  through  the  favorable  vote  of  seventeen  members  of 
the  jury  he  very  tardily  in  his  career  received  a second-class  medal.  These 
men  felt  it  was  only  justice  to  recognize  his  talent  and  the  enormous  influence 
he  had  upon  the  rising  artists  of  the  younger  generation.  Einally,  on  New 
Year’s  Day,  1882,  through  the  influence  of  his  friend  M.  Antonin  Proust, 
now  director  of  the  Beaux-Arts,  he  received  the  cross  of  the  Legion  of  Honor, 
thus  becoming  ‘Hors  Concours’  at  the  Salon,  and  entitled  to  all  respect  from 
the  Erench,  a fact  which  somewhat  modified  public  opinion,  though  his  prin- 
cipal canvas  of  this  year,  ‘At  the  Bar  of  the  Eolies-Bergeres,’  in  which  the 
painting  of  still  life  was  inimitable,  excited  no  less  amazement  and  misunder- 
standing than  heretofore.  His  second  canvas,  ‘Jeanne’  (plate  iii),  was  well 
received. 

This  was  the  last  time  he  exhibited.  In  the  fall  of  1879  he  was  attacked 
with  locomotor  ataxia,  and  became  more  and  more  helpless  until  he  could  no 
longer  undertake  large  canvases,  though  during  the  last  year  of  his  life  he 
continued  to  paint  still  life.  Einally,  on  April  thirtieth,  ‘Varnishing  Day’  of 
the  year  1883,  he  died  of  an  amputation  of  the  leg  uselessly  performed  to  pre- 
vent blood-poisoning.  Although  unrepresented  at  the  Salon,  a hush  fell  upon 
the  multitude  when  the  news  spread  from  room  to  room,  and  even  the  many 
who  disliked  both  his  methods  and  his  work  felt  that  a sincere  and  thoughtful 
artist  had  departed  from  amongst  them.  At  his  funeral  there  was  a noted 
gathering  of  arti.sts,  literary  men,  diplomats,  men  of  science,  and  men  of 
the  world.  M.  Antonin  Proust,  Minister  of  Fine  Arts,  said  in  the  funeral 
oration:  “He  was  possessed  of  great  qualities  both  of  heart  and  mind,  which 
united  to  make  him  an  artist  and  a man.  If  his  talent  was  sometimes  unequal, 
it  was  always  characterized  by  a majestic  purpose.” 

[28] 


MANET 


29 


The  family,  together  with  M.  Antonin  Proust  and  M.  Duret,  decided  to 
hold  a posthumous  exposition  of  his  work,  and  they  obtained  permission  to 
use  a salon  of  the  Ecole  des  Beaux-Arts  for  the  purpose.  The  exhibition  was 
opened  in  January,  1884,  and  it  was  curious  to  note  the  change  that  had  come 
over  the  public  and  press.  Their  adverse  criticisms  were  too  recent  for  them 
to  praise  now  without  reserve,  but  they  realized  that  he  was  a man  of  power 
and  invention.  “They  could  verify  the  truth,”  writes  M.  Duret,  “of  his  never- 
ceasing  advance  towards  more  brilliancy  and  light,  and  recognized  the  great 
variety  of  his  subjects  and  arrangements.”  Following  this  exhibition  there 
was  a sale  of  his  pictures  for  the  benefit  of  his  widow,  which  realized  over  one 
hundred  and  sixteen  thousand  francs.  Finally,  in  1889,  at  the  third  Universal 
Exposition,  it  was  decided  to  exhibit  not  merely  pictures  painted  during  the 
preceding  decade,  but  those  of  the  whole  century,  1789-1889.  In  the  hands 
of  M.  Proust,  director,  and  M.  Roger  Marx,  inspector  of  the  Fine  Arts,  four- 
teen of  Manet’s  chief  canvases  were  hung  in  the  principal  Salon.  “At  its 
close,  there  was  hardly  a man,  among  those  capable  of  really  judging,  who 
refused  to  admit  that  Manet  was  a master,  and  to  place  him  in  the  first  row 
of  the  masters  of  the  century.” 

M.  Bazire  in  his  life  of  Manet,  written  the  very  year  of  his  death,  concludes 
by  saying,  “For  the  sake  of  his  enemies  as  well  as  for  his  friends,  for  the  sake 
of  his  detractors  as  well  as  for  his  admirers,  it  is  indispensable  that  Manet  re- 
main, and  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  he  will  remain.  The  device  which  he 
had  made  for  himself,  a play  upon  his  name,  is  a prophecy:  Manet  et  manebit.” 


%i)t  art  of  iHanet 

CARROLL  BECKWITH  IN  ‘MODERN  FRENCH  MASTERS* 

SUFFICIENT  time  has  elapsed  since  the  death  of  Edouard  Manet,  in 
1883,  to  permit  of  a comparatively  just  estimate  being  formed  of  his 
ability  as  an  artist,  and  of  the  influence  he  has  had  on  contemporaneous  art- 
movement  and  thought.  Artists  demonstrating  marked  individuality  in  their 
work  have  always  had  an  influence  more  or  less  strong,  and  sometimes  of 
long  duration,  upon  their  fellow  artists.  The  more  independent  the  individ- 
uality, and  the  wider  its  divergence  from  popular  and  routine  methods,  the 
greater  has  been  the  resultant  good,  both  in  awakening  the  minds  of  other 
producers  to  a keener  observance  of  nature  and  in  encouraging  the  timid  to 
efforts  at  expressing  their  innate  feelings  in  their  own  personal  way. 

Edouard  Manet’s  greatest  achievements  are  not  his  own  canvases;  for  in 
spite  of  his  profound  sincerity  and  untiring  industry  his  work  cannot  be  looked 
upon  otherwise  than  as  incomplete,  and  the  technical  problems  which  he  pro- 
pounded for  himself  he  never  entirely  or  satisfactorily  solved.  The  problems 
have,  however,  been  taken  up  by  many  thoughtful  painters,  who  have  like- 
wise striven  for  their  solution,  and  his  rebellious  protests  against  the  methods 
in  vogue  during  his  time  have  become  the  inheritance  of  the  profession. 

[29] 


30 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


The  present  century  gives  frequent  instances  of  the  powerful  effect  of  a 
strong  and  well-defined  personality  upon  current  movement  and  thought  in 
art.  One  has  but  to  mention  the  names  of  David,  Ingres,  Constable,  Dela- 
croix, and,  lastly,  Manet,  the  leader  of  the  wide-spread  Impressionist  move- 
ment, the  one  man  who,  after  Constable,  taught  painters  to  open  their  eyes 
and  see  the  light  and  air  in  the  world  around  them.  To  what  degree  of  truth 
these  searchers  for  light  and  atmosphere  and  the  just  rendering  of  values 
have  attained  is  yet  a question.  The  results  of  human  perception  as  portrayed 
upon  canvas  are  so  entirely  dependent  upon  the  medium,  the  pigment,  that 
the  end  sought  for  is  often  defeated.  Tones  which  upon  the  day  of  their 
execution  clearly  and  accurately  give  the  impression  of  the  spectator  of  air, 
atmosphere,  or  light  may  in  a very  few  years,  or  even  months,  so  deteriorate 
and  change  chemically  that  the  same  just  transcription  of  nature  no  longer 
exists,  and  the  purpose  of  the  artist  is  entirely  lost.  Much  of  the  work  of 
Manet  has  undoubtedly  suffered  in  this  manner.  Herein  unquestionably  lies 
the  superiority  of  an  art  emanating  from  the  sensibilities  of  the  mind  and  heart 
over  those  of  the  eye.  In  the  former  case  the  work  may  blacken,  tarnish,  or 
corrode,  but  the  innate  feeling  will  not  be  lost;  whereas  in  the  latter,  once  the 
semblance  of  the  fact  is  encroached  upon  by  time,  the  aim  of  the  work  is 
seriously  weakened. 

This,  however,  must  not  be  interpreted  as  undervaluing  realism  in  art,  or  as 
urging  the  superiority  of  poetic  ideality  over  the  sterling  qualities  of  fact  and 
reality.  It  is  simply  to  call  attention  to  the  great  difficulty  under  which  a 
searcher  for  light  must  necessarily  labor.  Neither  must  it  be  concluded  that 
Manet  was  devoid  of  the  poetic  sense,  or  that  his  work  was  without  feeling. 
His  main  effort  was  a rendering  of  fact;  his  deepest  interest, -the  truthful 
juxtaposition  of  values,  the  broad  and  simple  treatment  of  planes,  combined 
with  a constant  search  for  the  character  of  the  person  or  object  portrayed. 
These  points  must  be  always  borne  in  mind,  while  contemplating  his  work, 
to  enable  one  to  arrive  at  a fair  estimate  of  his  powers  as  an  artist. 

GEORGE  MOORE  ‘MODERN  PAINTING’ 

TO  understand  Manet’s  genius  the  nineteenth  century  would  have  re- 
quired ten  years  more  than  usual,  for  in  Manet  there  is  nothing  but  good 
painting,  and  there  is  nothing  that  the  nineteenth  century  dislikes  as  much  as 
good  painting.  In  Whistler  there  is  an  exquisite  and  inveigling  sense  of  beauty; 
in  Degas  there  is  an  extraordinary  acute  criticism  of  life;  and  so  the  least  brutal 
section  of  the  public  ended  by  pardoning  Whistler  his  brush-work  and  Degas 
his  beautiful  drawing.  But  in  Manet  there  is  nothing  but  good  painting,  and 
it  is  therefore  possible  that  he  might  have  lived  till  he  was  eighty  without 
obtaining  recognition.  Death  alone  could  accomplish  the  miracle  of  opening 
the  public’s  eyes  to  his  merits.  During  his  life  the  excuse  given  for  the  con- 
stant persecution  waged  against  him  by  the  “authorities”  was  his  excessive 
originality.  But  this  was  mere  subterfuge;  what  was  really  hated — what 
made  him  so  unpopular  — was  the  extraordinary  beauty  of  his  handling. 
Whatever  he  painted  became  beautiful  — his  hand  was  dowered  with  the 

[30] 


MANET 


31 


gift  of  quality,  and  there  his  art  began  and  ended.  His  painting  of  still  life 
never  has  been  exceeded,  and  never  will  be.  I remember  a pear  that  used  to 
hang  in  his  studio.  Hals  would  have  taken  his  hat  off  to  it.  . . . 

And  never  did  this  mysterious  power  which  produces  what  artists  know  as 
“quality”  exist  in  greater  abundance  in  any  fingers  than  it  did  in  the  slow, 
thick  fingers  of  Edouard  Manet  — never  since  the  world  began;  not  in 
Velasquez,  not  in  Hals,  not  in  Rubens,  not  in  Titian.  As  an  artist  Manet 
could  not  compare  with  the  least  among  these  illustrious  painters;  but  as  a 
manipulator  of  oil-color  he  never  was  and  never  will  be  excelled.  Manet  was 
born  a painter  as  absolutely  as  any  man  that  ever  lived,  so  absolutely  that  a 
very  high  and  lucid  intelligence  never  for  a moment  came  between  him  and 
the  desire  to  put  anything  into  his  picture  except  good  painting.  I remem- 
ber his  saying  to  me,  “I  also  tried  to  write,  but  I did  not  succeed;  I never 
could  do  anything  but  paint.” 

RICHARDMUTHER  ‘MODE  RNPAINTING’ 

From  this  time  (1870)  his  great  problem  was  the  sun,  the  glow  of  day- 
light, the  tremor  of  the  air  upon  the  earth  basking  in  light.  He  became  a 
natural  philosopher  who  could  never  satisfy  himself,  studying  the  effect  of 
light  and  determining  with  the  observation  of  a man  of  science  how  the  at- 
mosphere alters  the  phenomena  of  color. 

In  tender,  virginal,  light  gray  tones,  never  seen  before,  he  depicted,  in 
fourteen  pictures  exhibited  at  a dealer’s,  the  luxury  and  grace  of  Paris,  the 
bright  days  of  summer,  and  soiries,  flooded  with  gaslight,  the  faded  features 
of  the  fallen  maiden,  and  the  refined  chic  of  the  woman  of  the  world.  There 
was  to  be  seen  ‘Nana,’  that  marvel  of  audacious  grace.  Laced  in  a blue  silk 
corset,  and  otherwise  clad  merely  in  a muslin  smock,  with  her  feet  in  pearl- 
gray  stockings,  the  blond  woman  stands  at  the  mirror  painting  her  lips,  and 
carelessly  replying  to  the  words  of  a man  who  is  watching  her  upon  a sofa 
behind.  Near  it  hung  balcony  scenes,  fleeting  sketches  from  the  skating- 
rink,  the  cafe  concert,  the  Bal  de  VOpha,  the  dejeuner  scene  at  Pere  Lathuille’s, 
and  the  ‘Bar  at  the  Folies-Bergeres.’  In  one  case  he  has  made  daylight  the 
subject  of  searching  study;  in  another,  the  artificial  illumination  of  the  foot- 
lights. ‘Music  in  the  Tuileries’  reveals  a crowd  of  people  swarming  in  an 
open,  sunny  place.  Every  figure  was  introduced  as  a patch  of  color,  but  these 
patches  were  alive  and  this  multitude  spoke.  One  of  the  best  pictures  was 
‘Boating’ — a craft  boldly  cut  away  in  its  frame,  after  tbe  manner  of  the 
Japanese,  and  seated  in  it  a young  lady  in  light  blue  and  a young  man  in 
white,  their  figures  contrasting  finely  with  the  delicate  gray  of  the  water  and 
the  atmosphere  impregnated  with  moisture.  And  scattered  amongst  these 
pictures  there  were  to  be  found  powerful  sea-pieces  and  charming,  piquant 
portraits. 

Manet  had  a passion  for  the  world.  He  was  a man  with  a slight  and 
graceful  figure,  a beard  of  the  color  known  as  blond  cendre,  deep  blue  eyes 
filled  with  the  fire  of  youth,  a refined,  clever  face,  aristocratic  hands,  and  a 
manner  of  great  urbanity.  With  his  wife,  the  highly  cultured  daughter  of  a 

[31] 


32 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


Dutch  musician,  he  went  into  the  best  circles  of  Parisian  society,  and  was 
popular  ever3Twhere  for  his  trenchant  judgment  and  his  sparkling  intellect. 
His  conversation  was  vivid  and  sarcastic.  He  was  famous  for  his  wit  a la 
Gavarni.  He  delighted  in  the  delicate  perfume  of  drawing-rooms,  the  shining 
candle-light  at  receptions;  he  worshiped  modernity  and  the  piquant  frou- 
frou of  toilettes;  he  was  the  first  who  stood  with  both  feet  in  the  world  which 
seemed  so  inartistic  to  others.  Thus  the  progress  made  in  the  acquisition 
of  subject  and  material  may  be  seen  even  in  the  outward  appearance  of  the 
three  pioneers  of  modern  art.  Millet  in  his  portrait  stands  in  wooden  shoes; 
Courbet,  in  his  shirt-sleeves;  Manet  wears  a tall  hat  and  a frock  coat.  Millet, 
the  peasant,  painted  peasants.  Courbet,  the  democrat  from  the  provinces, 
gave  the  rights  of  citizenship  to  the  artisan,  but  without  himself  deserting 
the  provinces  and  the  bourgeoisie.  He  was  repelled  by  everything  either  dis- 
tinguished or  refined.  In  such  matters  he  could  not  find  the  force  and  ve- 
hemence which  were  all  he  sought.  Manet,  the  Parisian  and  the  man  of  re- 
finement, gave  art  the  elegance  of  modern  life.  . . . 

But  the  seed  which  he  had  scattered  when  he  died  had  already  thrown  out 
roots.  It  had  taken  him  years  to  force  open  the  doors  of  the  Salon,  but  to-day 
his  name  shines  in  letters  of  gold  upon  the  facade  of  the  Ecole  des  Beaux- 
Arts  as  that  of  the  man  who  has  spoken  the  most  decisive  final  utterance  on 
behalf  of  the  liberation  of  modern  art.  His  achievement,  which  seems  to 
have  been  an  important  alteration  in  the  method  of  painting,  was  in  reality  a 
renovation  in  the  method  of  looking  at  the  world  and  a renovation  in  the 
method  of  thinking. 

CAMILLE  MAUCLAIR  ‘THE  FRENCH  IMPRESSIONISTS’ 

IT  will  be  seen  that  Manet  fought  through  all  his  life:  few  artists’  lives 
have  been  nobler.  His  has  been  an  example  of  untiring  energy;  he  em- 
ployed it  as  much  in  working  as  in  making  a stand  against  prejudices.  Re- 
jected, accepted,  rejected  again,  he  delivered  with  enormous  courage  and 
faith  his  attack  upon  a jury  which  represented  routine.  As  he  fought  in  front 
of  his  easel,  he  still  fought  before  the  public,  without  ever  relaxing,  without 
changing,  alone,  apart  even  from  those  whom  he  loved,  who  had  been  shaped 
by  his  example.  This  great  painter,  one  of  those  who  did  most  honor  to  the 
French  soul,  had  the  genius  to  create  by  himself  an  Impressionism  of  his  own 
which  will  always  remain  his  own,  after  having  given  evidence  of  gifts  of  the 
first  order  in  the  tradition  handed  down  by  the  masters  of  the  real  and  the 
good.  He  cannot  be  confused  either  with  Monet  or  with  Pissarro  and  Renoir. 
His  comprehension  of  light  is  a special  one,  his  technique  is  not  in  accordance 
with  the  system  of  color-spots;  it  observes  the  theory  of  complementary  color 
and  of  the  division  of  tones  without  departing  from  a grand  style,  from  a 
classic  stateliness,  from  a superb  sureness.  Manet  has  not  been  the  inventor 
of  Impressionism,  which  co-existed  with  his  work  since  1865;  but  he  has 
rendered  it  immense  services  by  taking  upon  himself  all  the  outbursts  of  anger 
addressed  to  the  innovators,  by  making  a breach  in  public  opinion,  through 
which  his  friends  have  passed  in  behind  him.  Probably  without  him  all  these 

[32J  ' 


MANET 


33 


artists  would  have  remained  unknown,  or  at  least  without  influence,  because 
they  all  were  bold  characters  in  art,  but  timid  or  disdainful  in  life.  Degas, 
Monet,  and  Renoir  were  fine  natures  with  a horror  of  polemics,  who  wished 
to  hold  aloof  from  the  Salons  and  were  resigned  from  the  outset  to  be  misunder- 
stood. They  were,  so  to  say,  electrified  by  the  magnificent  example  of  Manet’s 
fighting  spirit,  and  Manet  was  generous  enough  to  take  upon  himself  the  re- 
proaches levelled,  not  only  against  his  work,  but  against  theirs.  His  twenty 
years  of  open  war,  sustained  with  an  abnegation  worthy  of  all  esteem,  must 
be  considered  as  one  of  the  most  significant  phenomena  of  the  history  of  the 
artists  of  all  ages. 

This  work  of  Manet,  so  much  discussed  and  produced  under  such  torment- 
ing conditions,  owes  its  importance  beyond  all  to  its  power  and  frankness. 
Ten  years  of  developing  the  first  manner,  tragically  limited  by  the  war  of 
1870;  thirteen  years  of  developing  the  second  evolution,  parallel  with  the 
efforts  of  the  Impressionists.  The  period  from  i860  to  1870  is  logically  con- 
nected with  Hals  and  Goya;  from  1870  to  1883  the  artist’s  modernity  is 
complicated  by  the  study  of  light.  His  personality  appears  there  even  more 
original,  but  one  may  well  give  the  palm  to  those  works  of  Manet  which  are 
painted  in  his  classic  and  low-toned  manner.  He  had  all  the  pictorial  gifts 
which  make  the  glory  of  the  masters;  full,  true,  broad  composition,  coloring 
of  irresistible  power,  blacks  and  grays  'which  cannot  be  found  elsewhere  since 
Velasquez  and  Goya,  and  a profound  knowledge  of  values.  He  has  tried  his 
hand  at  everything;  portraits,  landscapes,  seascapes,  scenes  of  modern  life, 
still-life,  and  nudes  have  each  in  their  turn  served  his  ardent  desire  of  creation. 
His  was  a much  finer  comprehension  of  contemporary  life  than  seems  to  be 
admitted  by  Realism;  one  has  only  to  compare  him  with  Courbet  to  see  how 
far  more  nervous  and  intelligent  he  was,  without  loss  to  the  qualities  of  truth 
and  robustness.  His  pictures  will  always  remain  documents  of  the  greatest 
importance  on  the  society,  the  manners,  and  customs  of  the  second  Empire. 
He  did  not  possess  the  gift  of  psychology.  His  ‘Christ  aux  Anges’  and  ‘Jesus 
insulte’  are  obviously  only  pieces  of  painting  without  idealism.  He  was,  like 
the  great  Dutch  virtuosos,  and  like  certain  Italians,  more  eye  than  soul.  Yet 
his  ‘Maximilian,’  the  drawings  to  Poe’s  ‘Raven,’  and  certain  sketches  show 
that  he  might  have  realized  some  curious  psychological  works  had  he  not 
been  so  completely  absorbed  by  the  immediate  reality  and  by  the  desire  for 
beautiful  paint.  A beautiful  painter  — this  is  what  he  was  before  everything 
else,  this  is  his  fairest  fame,  and  it  is  almost  inconceivable  that  the  juries  of 
the  Salons  failed  to  understand  him.  They  waxed  indignant  over  his  subjects, 
which  offer  only  a restricted  interest,  and  they  did  not  see  the  altogether 
classic  quality  of  this  technique  without  bitumen,  without  glazing,  without 
tricks;  of  this  vibrating  color;  of  this  rich  paint;  of  this  passionate  design  so 
suitable  for  expressing  movement  and  gestures  true  to  life;  of  this  simple  com- 
position where  the  whole  picture  is  based  upon  two  or  three  values  with  the 
straightforwardness  one  admires  in  Rubens,  Jordaens,  and  Hals. 

Manet  will  occupy  an  important  position  in  the  French  school.  He  is  the 
most  original  painter  of  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  one  who 

[33] 


34 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


has  really  created  a great  movement.  His  work,  the  fecundity  of  which  is 
astonishing,  is  unequal.  One  has  to  remember  that,  besides  the  incessant 
strife  which  he  kept  up  — a strife  which  would  have  killed  many  artists  — 
he  had  to  find  strength  for  two  grave  crises  in  himself.  He  joined  one  move- 
ment, then  freed  himself  of  it,  then  invented  another  and  recommenced  to 
learn  painting  at  a point  where  anybody  else  would  have  continued  in  his 
previous  manner.  “Each  time  I paint,”  he  said  to  Mallarme,  “I  throw  my- 
self into  the  water  to  learn  swimming.  ...” 

There  remains,  then,  a great  personality  who  knew  how  to  dominate  the 
rather  coarse  conceptions  of  Realism,  who  influenced  by  his  modernity  all 
contemporary  illustration,  who  re-established  a sound  and  strong  tradition  in 
the  face  of  the  Academy,  and  who  not  only  created  a new  transition,  but 
marked  his  place  on  the  new  road  which  he  had  opened.  To  him  Impression- 
ism owes  its  existence;  his  tenacity  enabled  it  to  take  root  and  to  vanquish  the 
opposition  of  the  school;  his  work  has  enriched  the  world  by  some  beautiful 
examples  which  demonstrate  the  union  of  the  two  principles  of  Realism  and 
of  that  technical  Impressionism  which  was  to  supply  Monet,  Renoir,  Pissarro, 
and  Sisley  with  an  object  for  their  efforts.  . . . 

To-day  Manet  is  considered  almost  as  a classic  glory:  and  the  progress  for 
which  he  had  given  the  impulse  has  been  so  rapid  that  many  are  astonished 
that  he  should  ever  have  been  considered  audacious.  Sight  is  transformed, 
strife  is  extinguished,  and  a large,  select  public,  familiar  with  Monet  and 
Renoir,  judge  Manet  almost  as  a long-defunct  initiator.  One  has  to  know  his 
admirable  life,  one  has  to  know  well  the  incredible  inertia  of  the  Salons  where 
he  appeared,  to  give  him  his  full  due.  And  when,  after  the  acceptance  of 
Impressionism,  the  unavoidable  reaction  will  take  place,  Manet’s  qualities 
of  solidity,  truth,  and  science  will  appear  such  that  he  will  survive  many  of 
those  to  whom  he  has  opened  the  road  and  facilitated  the  success  at  the  ex- 
pense of  his  own.  It  will  be  seen  that  Degas  and  he  have,  more  than  the  others, 
and  with  less  apparent  iclat,  united  the  gifts  which  produce  durable  works  in 
the  midst  of  the  fluctuations  of  fashion  and  the  caprices  of  taste  and  views. 
Manet  can,  at  the  Louvre  or  any  other  gallery,  hold  his  own  in  the  most 
crushing  surroundings,  prove  his  personal  qualities,  and  worthily  represent  a 
period  which  he  loved. 


Cfje  of  iWanet 

DESCRIPTIONS  OF  THE  PLATES 

<BOY  WITH  THE  SWORD’  PLATE  I 

The  ‘Boy  with  the  Sword’  is  perhaps  the  most  attractive  canvas  Manet 
ever  painted  and  is  acknowledged  by  all  critics  to  be  a masterpiece.  As 
we  have  seen,  it  was  painted  when  the  artist  was  most  directly  under  the  in- 
fluence of  Velasquez,  which  is  shown  in  its  sober  coloring.  The  child  is  hab- 

[34] 


MANET 


35 


ited  in  a dull  black  costume  with  broad  white  linen  collar  and  blue  stockings, 
against  a warm  gray  background.  He  stands  at  full  length  in  the  centre  of 
the  picture,  painted  in  life  size,  gazing  directly  at  the  spectator  and  grasping 
a big  sword  almost  too  heavy  for  him.  His  expression  is  particularly  winsome 
and  in  its  idealization  is  not  quite  so  characteristic  of  Manet  as  many  other 
less  obviously  attractive  canvases. 

Mr.  Carroll  Beckwith,  writing  in  ‘Modern  French  Masters,’  says;  “In 
studying  a picture  by  Manet  two  things  must  always  be  clearly  kept  in  mind, 
les  valeurs  and  la  tache.  However  varied  his  choice  of  subject,  however  differ- 
ent his  effects  of  light  and  shade,  values  and  la  tache  were  constantly  before 
him,  urging  their  superior  importance  over  all  other  qualities,  forcing  them- 
selves upon  his  vision,  and  through  his  hand  upon  the  canvas.  There  they 
were  emphasized  with  aggressive  prominence,  destroying  the  half-tones  and 
blotting  out  details.  Witness  the  fine  example  of  his  work  in  the  Metropolitan 
Museum  of  New  York — ‘The  Boy  with  the  Sword.’  Notice  how  the  face 
becomes  one  simple,  almost  unbroken  mass,  marked  by  its  strength  of  local 
color.  Notice  how  the  eyes  are  devoid  of  modeling.  To  Manet  the  human 
eye  was  but  a spot  of  dark  upon  the  light  plane  of  the  flesh.  See,  too,  how 
perfectly  the  background  takes  its  place  behind  the  figure.  One  could  accu- 
rately measure  the  distance  the  little  figure  stands  from  the  curtain  behind  it. 
This  simplicity  of  aim,  this  research  for  a few  fundamental  truths,  were  his 
constant  protest  against  the  tyranny  of  tradition,  against  the  intricacies  of 
composition  and  sugary  elaboration  which  pervaded  the  popular  school  of 
French  art  in  his  day.” 

The  picture,  though  signed  and  dated  i860,  was  not  exhibited  until  1867. 
It  was  given  to  the  Metropolitan  Museum  of  New  York,  in  1889,  by  Mr. 
Erwin  Davis,  and  measures  about  four  feet  high  by  three  broad. 

‘GOOD  BOCK’  PLATE  II 

This  was  the  one  and  only  canvas  of  Manet’s  that  ever  met  with  popu- 
larity. Exhibited  at  the  Salon  of  1873,  it  became  one  of  M.  Faure’s 
collection,  whose  catalogue  of  his  paintings  thus  describes  it:  “A  man  of  fifty 
years  — the  engraver  Belot  — is  seated  at  a little  table,  comfortably  installed 
in  an  armchair,  smoking  his  pipe  and  holding  in  his  hand  a large  glass  of 
beer,  a ‘bock.’  His  hair  and  beard  are  already  gray;  but  his  rubicund  face 
expresses  in  the  highest  degree  the  joy  of  living.  He  wears  a black  coat,  gray 
trousers,  a vest  of  the  same  color,  but  a little  darker,  and  a cap  of  otter.” 

All  critics  have  agreed  in  comparing  this  canvas  to  one  by  Franz  Hals,  and 
George  Moore  writes  of  it:  “In  an  exhibition  of  portraits  now  open  in  Paris, 
entitled  Ceut-Chefs-J’(Euvre,  Manet  has  been  paid  the  highest  honor;  he 
himself  would  not  demand  a greater  honor  — his  ‘Good  Bock’  has  been  hung 
next  to  a celebrated  portrait  by  Hals.  . . . 

“Without  seeing  it,  I know  that  the  Hals  is  nobler,  grander;  I know,  sup- 
posing the  Hals  to  be  a good  one,  that  its  flight  is  that  of  an  eagle  as  compared 
with  the  flight  of  a hawk.  The  comparison  is  exaggerated;  but  then,  so  are 
all  comparisons.  I also  know  that  Hals  does  not  tell  us  more  about  his  old 

[35] 


36 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


woman  than  Manet  tells  us  about  the  man  who  sits  so  gravely  by  his  glass  of 
foaming  ale,  so  clearly  absorbed  by  it,  so  oblivious  to  all  other  joys  but  those 
that  it  brings  him.  Hals  never  placed  any  one  more  clearly  in  his  favorite 
hour  of  the  day,  the  well-desired  hour,  looked  forward  to  perhaps  since  the 
beginning  of  the  afternoon.  . . . Nor  did  Hals  ever  paint  better;  I mean  that 
nowhere  in  Hals  will  you  find  finer  handling,  or  a more  direct  luminous  or 
simple  expression  of  what  the  eye  saw.  It  has  all  the  qualities  I have  enumer- 
ated, and  yet  it  falls  short  of  Hals.  It  has  not  the  breadth  and  scope  of  the 
great  Dutchman.  There  is  a sense  of  effort,  on  sent  le  souffle,  and  in  Hals  one 
never  does.  It  is  more  bound  together;  it  does  not  flow  with  the  mighty  and 
luminous  ease  of  the  chefs  d'ceuvre  at  Haarlem.” 

‘JEANNE’  PLATE  III 

The  picture,  another  of  the  canvases  belonging  to  the  Collection  Faure, 
was  one  of  the  two  canvases  that  Manet  sent  to  the  Salon  of  1882,  the 
last  at  which  he  exhibited.  “The  public  were  clement  in  their  judgments,  I 
would  confess  it,”  writes  M.  Bazire,  “for  the  spring-like  figure,  designated  in 
the  catalogue  by  the  name  of  ‘Jeanne.’  This  adorable  promenader,  with  a 
slightly  turned-up  nose,  bright  cheeks,  attractive  throat,  rounded  figure, 
hiding  its  grace  under  a parasol  and  walking  swiftly  under  the  trees,  whose 
foliage  cuts  it  off  from  the  crude  blue  of  the  sky,  I called  a ‘spring-like  figure’ 
and  I make  my  excuses  — it  is  the  spring  itself. 

“The  ‘Spring,’  that  is  in  fact  the  name  that  Manet  intended  to  give  to  this 
portrait,  the  first  of  four  panels:  ‘The  Seasons.’  Time  failed  him.  There 
would  have  been  a companion:  the  ‘Autumn,’  for  which  the  beautiful  Mery 
Laurent,  very  much  muffled  up,  lent  her  cameo-like  profile.  But  ‘Winter’ 
and  ‘Spring’  were  never  painted,  and  it  is  a loss  and  a regret  the  more.” 

‘THE  BALCONY’  PLATE  IV 

The  BALCONY’  was  exhibited  for  the  first  time  at  the  Salon  of  1869, 
and  no  picture  of  Manet’s  was  ever  received  with  more  cruel  hilarity 
than  this  one.  It  represented  two  young  women,  one  seated,  the  other  stand- 
ing upon  a green  balcony,  and  a young  man  in  the  background  behind  them. 
Mile.  Berthe  Morisot,  the  young  painter  from  Bourges,  who  came  under  the 
influence  of  Manet’s  art  and  finally  married  his  younger  brother  Eugene, 
posed  for  the  seated  woman;  Guillemet,  the  landscapist,  for  the  figure  in  the 
background.  The  public  could  see  no  beauty  in  the  picture,  could  not  appre- 
ciate the  perfection  of  the  workmanship,  and  only  exclaimed  that  they  had 
never  seen  a green  balcony,  they  had  never  seen  two  women  in  any  picture 
so  disagreeable  in  figure  and  so  “bundled”  into  their  clothes,  and  the  little 
dog  at  the  feet  of  the  women  they  considered  a little  monster  and  in  no  better 
taste  than  the  black  cat  in  ‘Olympia.’ 

In  1894  the  painter  Caillebotte  died,  leaving  his  entire  collection  of  pictures 
to  the  Luxembourg,  among  them  this  much-abused  canvas.  It  hangs  to-day 
in  the  Louvre. 


[36] 


MANET 


37 


‘WOMAN  WITH  THE  PARROT  PLATE  V 

I ''HE  light  in  this  picture  is  dull,  uniform,  and  pervasive,”  writes  Mr. 

A Caffin,  in  ‘How  to  Study  Pictures.’  “The  photograph  has  falsified 
the  effect  by  making  the  background  appear  dark.  In  the  original  it  is  a 
drabbish  gray,  a slightly  yellower  gray  than  the  dove-gray  on  the  wings  of 
the  parrot,  whose  head,  on  the  contrary,  is  a whitish  gray.  Again,  the  glass  of 
water  at  the  top  of  the  stand  is  gray,  but  a much  more  sharply  whitish  tone  in 
the  high-lights;  while,  still  again,  the  pan  on  the  floor  is  of  dull  pewter,  a 
lighter  gray  than  that  of  the  wall  and  less  light  than  the  parrot’s  head.  So  far, 
you  observe,  the  artist  has  played  upon  grays.  As  a musician  might  explain 
it,  he  has  given  several  modulations  of  the  chord  of  gray,  including  the  major 
and  minor,  the  augmented  and  diminished.  In  other  words,  he  has  made  a 
color-harmony  of  slightly  diflFering  tones  of  gray,  taking  pleasure  in  observing 
and  rendering  those  slight  distinctions,  and  also  in  noting  how  differently  the 
light  is  reflected  from  the  different  surfaces  — in  a sort  of  dull  and  smothered 
way  from  the  plaster  on  the  wall;  deep  and  lustrous  from  the  bird’s  wing; 
more  softly  broken  up  from  the  feathers  on  the  head;  sharp  and  pellucid  from 
the  glass,  and  with  duller  luster  from  the  pan.  The  result  is  that  by  careful 
discrimination  between  the  various  actions  of  light  he  has  given  us  a real  ap- 
preciation of  the  textures  of  the  different  objects  — a refinement  of  realism 
in  the  way  of  painting  that  is  far  beyond  the  realism  of  Courbet. 

“The  color  of  the  gown  is  that  of  faded  rose-leaves;  that  is  to  say,  very  pale 
rose  in  the  shadows,  a pale  straw-color  where  it  catches  the  light.  The  mod- 
eling has  been  obtained  by  varying  these  two  tones,  according  to  the  amount 
of  light  contained  in  the  various  parts  of  the  silk,  the  only  approach  to 
shadows  being  some  dove-gray  tones,  where  you  see  the  dark  spots  round  the 
edge  of  the  right  arm,  and  under  the  hand  and  cuff  of  the  left.  Notwithstand- 
ing that  the  artist  limited  himself  to  these  few  tones,  and  chose  a gown  which 
hangs  from  the  shoulders  with  very  few  folds,  he  has  made  us  realize  the  bal- 
loon-like roundness  of  the  garment,  and,  moreover,  the  existence  of  a figure 
underneath  it.  Again  the  expression  ‘faded  rose-leaves’  describes  the  pre- 
vailing hue  of  the  face  and  hands;  the  latter  are  practically  of  the  same  color 
as  the  gown;  yet  we  shall  have  no  doubt,  especially  in  the  original,  that  the 
texture  of  the  one  is  silk,  of  the  others  flesh,  because  of  the  method  of  the 
brush-work.  Upon  the  dress  it  was  laid  on  in  sweeps;  upon  the  flesh-parts,  in 
circular  strokes  and  dabs. 

“So  far,  then,  as  we  have  examined  the  color-scheme  of  the  picture,  it  is  a 
harmony  of  faded  rose-leaves  and  gray;  but  to  prevent  it  from  being  tame, 
to  make  it  resonant  and  vibrant,  certain  notes  of  positive  color  were  intro- 
duced; for  example,  the  black  velvet  band  round  the  neck,  a crimson  tail  to 
the  bird,  and  the  yellow  rind  of  the  orange.  I may  add  that  this  clear  note  of 
yellow  receives  a dull  echo  in  the  drabbish-yellow  sand,  mingles  with  the 
rich  brown  of  the  wooden  pedestal,  and  reappears  more  noticeably  in  the 
lighter  brown  of  the  girl’s  hair.” 

This  picture  was  also  a gift  to  the  Metropolitan  Museum  of  New  York,  in 
1889,  from  Mr.  Erwin  Davis,  and  measures  about  seven  by  five  feet. 

[37] 


38 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


‘REST’  PLATE  VI 

This  canvas,  entitled  ‘Rest,’  was  in  reality  a portrait  of  Mile.  Berthe 
Morisot  (afterwards  Mme.  Eugene  Manet),  a young  artist  of  the  Im- 
pressionist school,  of  great  power  as  an  artist  and  of  great  charm  and  dis- 
tinction as  a woman.  She  posed  for  Manet  many  times,  and  here  she  is  rep- 
resented dressed  in  a simple  white  muslin,  half  reclining  upon  a sofa,  her 
arms  thrown  out  on  either  side,  resting  on  the  cushions  in  an  easy  attitude. 
This  canvas  was  exhibited  in  1873,  the  same  year  as  ‘Good  Bock,’  but  while 
the  latter  met  with  popularity,  the  former  was  received  with  disdain. 

“I  prefer  Manet,”  says  George  Moore,  “in  the  quieter  and  I think  the  more 
original  mood  in  the  portrait  of  his  sister-in-law,  Madame  Morisot.  . . . 
Never  did  a white  dress  play  so  important  or  indeed  so  charming  a part  in  a 
picture.  The  dress  is  the  picture  — this  common  white  dress,  with  black 
spots,  une  robe  a poix,  une  petite  confection  de  soixante  cinq  francs,  and  very 
far  it  is  from  all  resemblance  to  the  diaphanous,  fairy-like  skirts  of  our  eight- 
eenth-century English  school,  but  I swear  to  you  no  less  charming.  It  is  a 
very  simple  and  yet  a very  beautiful  reality.  A lady,  in  white  dress  with  black 
spots,  sitting  on  a red  sofa,  a dark  chocolate  red,  in  the  subdued,  light  of  her 
own  quiet,  prosaic  French  appartment,  le  deuxieme  au  dessus  Ventre-sol.  The 
drawing  is  less  angular,  less  constipated,  than  that  of  ‘Olympia.’  How  well 
the  woman’s  body  is  in  the  dress!  There  is  the  bosom,  the  waist,  the  hips,  the 
knees,  and  the  white-stockinged  foot  in  the  low  shoe,  coming  from  out  the 
dress.  The  drawing  about  the  hips  and  bosom  undulates  and  floats,  vague 
and  yet  precise,  in  a manner  that  recalls  Harlem,  and  it  is  not  until  we  turn 
to  the  face  that  we  come  upon  ominous  spaces  unaccounted  for,  forms  un- 
explained. The  head  is  so  charming  that  it  seems  a pity  to  press  our  examina- 
tion further.  But  to  understand  Manet’s  deficiency  is  to  understand  the  abyss 
that  separates  modern  from  ancient  art,  and  the  portrait  of  Madame  Morisot 
explains  them  as  well  as  another,  for  the  deficiency  I wish  to  point  out  exists 
in  Manet’s  best  portraits  as  well  as  in  his  worst.  The  face  in  this  picture  is 
like  the  face  in  every  picture  by  Manet.  Three  or  four  points  are  seized,  and 
the  spaces  between  are  left  unaccounted  for.  Whistler  has  not  the  strength 
of  Velasquez;  Manet  is  not  as  complete  as  Hals.” 

The  canvas  forms  a part  of  the  M.  G.  Vanderbilt  Collection  in  New  York. 

‘PORTRAIT  OF  HENRI  ROCHEFORT’  PLATE  VII 

Manet  painted  a number  of  splendid  male  portraits,  among  them  one 
of  Emile  Zola  in  his  studio,  where  the  canvas  of  the  rejected  ‘Olympia  ’ 
is  seen  hanging  on  the  wall;  another  of  M.  Pertuiset,  the  lion-hunter;  a notable 
third  of  M.  Antonin  Proust  in  three-quarters  length,  in  silk  hat  and  frock 
coat;  one  of  the  engraver  Desboutins,  called  ‘The  Artist,’  garbed  entirely  in 
gray  against  a brown  background,  and  who  stands  filling  his  pipe  while  a 
slender  and  graceful  greyhound  figures  in  the  background;  and  now,  in  1881, 
this  portrait  of  M.  Rochefort,  one  of  his  strongest.  M.  Duret  relates  how 
Manet,  attracted  by  the  strength  of  character  in  the  features  of  M.  Rochefort, 

[38] 


MANET 


39 


had  asked  the  latter  to  pose  for  him.  The  artist  placed  his  sitter  nearly  in 
profile  with  arms  crossed.  “It  is,”  writes  M.  Duret,  “a  powerful  work,  of 
the  nature  to  please  a connoisseur.  Manet,  who  had  done  it  moved  only  by 
an  artistic  sentiment,  without  thinking  of  drawing  profit,  offered  it  to  the 
original  and  would  have  been  happy  to  have  seen  him  accept  it.  But  Roche- 
fort, who  had  ever  loved  only  dry  and  highly  finished  painting,  found  it  un- 
pleasant. He  did  not  wish  it,  and  refused  it.  Some  time  after,  Manet  included 
it  in  a lot  of  canvases  sold  to  M.  Faure.” 

‘IN  THE  GARDEN’  PLATE  VIII 

This  picture,  as  we  have  seen,  was  a turning-point  in  Manet’s  career,  in 
that  it  was  his  first  attempt  to  pose  figures  in  the  open  air,  a method 
which  he  thereafter  generally  followed. 

“This  movement,  so  historically  memorable,  when  Manet  discovered  the 
sun  and  the  fine  fluid  of  the  atmosphere,  was  shortly  before  1870,”  writes 
Richard  Muther.  “Not  long  before  the  declaration  of  war  he  was  in  the  coun- 
try in  the  neighborhood  of  Paris,  staying  with  his  friend  De  Nittis;  but  he 
continued  to  work  as  though  he  were  at  home,  only  his  studio  was  here  the 
pleasure-ground.  Here  one  day  he  sat  in  full  sunlight,  placed  his  model 
among  the  flowers  of  the  turf,  and  began  to  paint.  The  result  was  ‘The  Gar- 
den,’ now  in  the  possession  of  Madarhe  de  Nittis.  The  young  wife  of  the 
Italian  painter  is  reclining  in  an  easy-chair,  between  her  husband,  who  is 
lying  on  the  grass,  and  her  child,  which  is  asleep  in  its  cradle. 

“Every  flower  is  fresh  and  bright  upon  the  fragrant  sward.  The  green  of 
the  stretch  of  grass  is  luminous,  and  everything  is  bathed  in  soft,  bright  at- 
mosphere; the  leaves  cast  their  blue  shadows  upon  the  yellow  gravel  path. 

‘ Plein-air’ made  its  entry  into  painting.  ...” 

This  picture  belongs  now  to  Mr.  H.  O.  Havemeyer’s  collection  in  New 
York. 

I 

‘OLYMPIA  * PLATE  IX 

The  celebrated  ‘Olympia’  of  1865,”  writes  Richard  Muther,  “now  to 
be  found  in  the  Luxembourg  [in  the  Louvre  at  the  present  writing], 
was  painted  during  this  stage  (experimental)  in  his  development;  it  represents 
a neurotic,  anaemic  creature,  who  stretches  out,  pale  and  sickly,  her  meagre 
nudity  upon  white  linen,  with  a purring  cat  at  her  feet,  whilst  a negress  in  a 
red  dress  draws  back  the  curtain,  offering  her  a bouquet.  With  this  picture 
— no  one  can  tell  why  — the  definite  battles  fought  over  Impressionism  be- 
gan. The  critics  who  talked  about  obscenity  were  not  consistent,  because 
Titian’s  pictures  of  Venus  with  her  female  attendant,  the  little  dog,  and  the 
youth  sitting  upon  the  edge  of  the  bed  are  not  usually  held  to  be  obscene. 
But  it  is  nevertheless  difficult  to  find  in  this  flatly  modeled  body  with  its  hard 
black  outlines  those  artistic  qualities  which  Zola  discovered  in  it.  The  pic- 
ture has  nothing  whatever  of  Titian  in  it,  but  it  may  almost  be  said  to  have 
something  of  Cranach.” 


[39] 


40 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


Though  the  nude  may  in  itself  be  ugly,  the  coloring  of  the  picture  is  beau- 
tiful and  the  accessories  wonderfully  painted,  as  in  the  white  linen  and  India 
silk  shawl  of  yellow  tones  embroidered  with  delicately  colored  flowers  upon 
which  the  figure  reclines,  as  iit-the  different  white  textures  in  the  picture,  first 
of  the  linen  sheet,  then  of  the  paper  in  which  the  bouquet  is  wrapped,  and 
lastly  in  the  servant’s  apron  and  cap,  the  cat  at  the  foot  of  the  bed  giving  just 
the  needed  touch  of  black. 

George  Moore  writes  of  this  canvas:  “The  Luxembourg  picture,  although 
one  of  the  most  showy  and  the  completest  amongst  Manet’s  masterpieces,  is 
not,  in  my  opinion,  either  the  most  charming  or  the  most  interesting;  and  yet 
it  would  be  difficult  to  say  that  this  of  the  many  life-sized  nudes  that  France 
has  produced  during  the  century  is  not  the  one  we  could  the  least  easily 
spare.  Ingres’  ‘Source’  compares  not  with  things  of  this  century,  but  with 
the  marbles  of  the  fourth  century  b.c.  Cabanel’s  ‘Venus’  is  a beautiful 
design,  but  its  destruction  would  create  no  appreciable  gap  in  the  history  of 
nineteenth-century  art.  The  destruction  of  ‘Olympia’  would.” 

At  the  sale  of  Manet’s  effects  in  1884  ‘Olympia’  and  ‘Argenteuil’  had  been 
bought  in  for  the  widow,  with  the  hope  that  some  day  they  might  go  to  a 
public  collection.  In  1889  an  American  appeared  who  wished  to  buy  the 
‘Olympia,’  but  the  painter  Sargent,  fearing  it  would  be  lost  to  view  in  a 
private  collection,  confided  his  beliefs  to  Monet,  who  started  a subscription  to 
raise  twenty  thousand  francs  to  give  to  Mme.  Manet  in  exchange  for  it.  The 
press  and  the  public  wished  a sample  of  Manet’s  work  for  the  Luxembourg, 
but  not  that  one,  but  his  friends  would  hear  of  no  concessions  and  especially 
desired  to  procure  ‘Olympia’  as  showing  the  originality  of  the  artist  to  the 
fullest  extent.  It  was  his  preferred  child  of  all  his  creations.  The  battle 
waged  hot,  but  all  the  artists,  men  of  letters,  and  connoisseurs  ranged  them- 
selves on  Manet’s  side.  Monet  finally  definitely  offered  it  to  the  Minister  of 
Fine  Arts.  Before  they  had  decided  whether  to  accept  it  or  not  there  was  a 
change  of  ministry;  it  was  definitely  accepted  November  17,  1890,  to  be 
placed  in  the  Luxembourg,  and  is  now  in  tbe  Louvre,  where  it  is  given  a 
position  of  prominence  in  the  hall  of  nineteenth-century  French  masters. 

‘THE  railway’  plate  X 

This  picture  marks  a novelty  amongst  his  works  sent  to  the  Salon,  that 
of  painting  in  the  open  air,”  writes  M.  Duret.  “He  had  executed  it  in 
a little  garden,  situated  behind  a house  in  the  rue  de  Rome.  The  public  and 
tbe  press  bad  not  sufficiently  taken  into  account,  in  arguing  about  it,  that  it 
had  to  do  with  a work  produced  directly  in  the  open  air.  They  had  quite 
simply,  as  was  their  habit,  been  offended  by  the  appearance  of  lively  colors, 
placed  side  by  side,  without  interposition  of  half-tones  or  conventional 
shadows. 

“To  the  reproach  of  being  painted  in  too  high  a key  should  be  added  that 
of  presenting  an  ‘incomprehensible’  subject.  In  fact,  ‘The  Railway’  was  not, 
properly  speaking,  the  subject  of  the  canvas,  the  two  persons  who  figured 
there  did  not  lend  themselves  to  any  significant  or  amusing  action;  for  the 

[40] 


MANET 


41 


public  almost  always  seeks  and  looks  in  a work  for  that  anecdote  which  can 
be  seen.  The  intrinsic  merit  of  the  painting,  the  value  of  the  art  due  to  the 
beauty  of  the  lines  or  to  the  quality  of  color,  things  essential  for  the  artist  or 
the  true  connoisseur,  remain  misunderstood  and  ignored  by  the  passer-by. 
But  Manet  had  put  into  his  canvas  of  ‘The  Railway’  two  persons,  in  order 
that  there  should  be  something  that  was  alive  in  it.  He  thus  had  to  do  with 
true  painting  and  could  have  referred  his  picture  to  the  Dutch  masters,  who 
have  so  often  kept  their  figures  unoccupied,  and  not  engaged  in  any  definite 
action.  He  had  represented  a young  woman  dressed  in  blue  seated  against  a 
grille  and  turned  toward  the  spectator,  whilst  near  her,  standing,  a little  girl 
in  white  is  holding  on  with  her  two  hands  to  the  barrier.  This  grille  served  as 
enclosure  to  the  little  garden,  overlooking  the  deep  trench  where  passes  the 
railroad  of  the  West,  near  the  station  of  Saint-Lazare.  Behind  the  two  girls 
can  be  seen  the  rails  and  the  smoke  of  the  locomotives,  whence  the  title  of  the 
picture.” 

This  picture,  as  well  as  that  entitled  ‘In  the  Garden,’  belongs  to  Mr.  H.  O. 
Havemeyer’s  collection  in  New  York. 

A LIST  OF  THE  PRINCIPAL  PAINTINGS  OF  MANET 
WITH  THEIR  PRESENT  LOCATIONS 

M THEODORE  DURET  in  his  monograph  on  Manet,  published  in  1902,  the 
• most  complete  work  that  has  appeared  on  the  artist,  catalogues  327  oils  and  78 
pastels.  We  append  a list  of  the  more  important  oils,  with  their  locations  in  1902. 

Belgium.  Brussels:  M.  Van  Cutsen:  Argenteuil;  At  Pere  Lathuille  — 

ENGLAND.  London:  George  Moore:  Portrait  of  Mme.  Manet  — FRANCE. 
Paris,  Louvre:  Olympia  (Plate  ix);  The  Balcony  (Plate  iv);  Angelina — M.  le 
Comte  de  Camondo:  Lola  de  Valence;  The  Fifer;  At  the  Piano;  The  Port  of  Bou- 
logne— M.  Durand-Ruel:  Music  at  the  Tuileries;  The  Spanish  Ballet;  Fishing;  The 
Old  Musician;  Portrait  of  Zacharie  Astruc;  The  Water-drinker;  Dead  Christ  and 
Angels;  Jesus  Insulted  by  the  Soldiers;  The  Good  Pipe;  The  Bull-fight;  Pier  at  Bou- 
logne; Portrait  of  Eva  Gonzales;  Portrait  of  M.  Faure  in  the  role  of  Hamlet;  Portrait  of 
M.  Pertuiset,  the  Lion-hunter;  My  Garden  — M.  T.  Duret:  Portrait  of  Theodore 
Duret;  Marine  in  Storm;  Marine  in  Calm  — M.  Faure : The  Absinthe  Drinker;  The 
Spanish  Singer;  The  Reader;  Port  of  Bordeaux;  Good  Bock  (Plate  ii);  Sea-fishers 
The  Bun;  Portrait  of  Henri  Rochefort  (Plate  vii);  Jeanne  (Plate  iii)  — M.  P.  Galli- 
MARD:  The  Linen — Mme.  A.  Hecht:  The  Beggar;  The  Swallows — M.  C.  Lafon- 
taine:  Polichinelle  — M.  Leclanche:  Boy  with  Cherries — M.  Manzi:  The  Nymph 
Surprised;  Portrait  of  Mme.  Manet  in  the  Conservatory — ^M  Moreau-Nelaton: 
Breakfast  on  the  Grass  — M.  A.  Pellerin:  View  of  the  Universal  Exposition  of  1867; 
Eva  Gonzales  painting  in  her  Studio;  Claude  Monet  in  his  Studio;  The  Artist;  Nana; 
The  Bun;  At  the  Cafe;  Portrait  of  Manet  by  himself,  with  the  Palette  (see  portrait);  At 
the  Bar  of  the  Folies-Bergeres  — M.  A.  Proust:  Portrait  of  M.  Antonin  Proust — ■ 
M.  Rosenberg:  Boy  with  the  Dog — Mme.  E.  Rouart:  Portraits  of  M.  and  Mme. 
Manet;  The  Lady  with  the  Fans;  Young  Woman  in  Black  Hat;  Portrait  of  Mme. 
Eugene  Manet  (nee  Mile.  Berthe  Morisot) — M.  Henri  Rouart:  The  Music  Lesson  — 
M.  VoLLARD:  Execution  of  the  Emperor  Maximilian  — M.  E.  Zola:  Portrait  of 

M.  flmile  Zola — -GERMANY.  Berlin,  National  Gallery:  In  the  Conservatory  — 
Herr  Cassier:  House  at  Reuil;  Herr  Liebermann:  Roses  and  Lilacs  — Lubeck,  Dr. 
Max  Linde:  Portrait  of  Manet  by  himself,  standing;  Portrait  of  George  Moore  — 
UNITED  STATES.  Boston,  M.  Sears:  The  Street  Singer  — Farmington,  A.  Pope: 

[41] 


42 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


La  Posada  — New  York,  Metropolitan  Museum:  Boy  with  the  Sword  (Plate  i); 
Woman  with  the  Parrot  (Plate  v)  — H.  O.  Havemeyer:  Young  Man  in  Costume  de 
Majo;  Mile.  V.  in  Costume  d’Espada;  Matador  saluting;  In  the  Garden  (Plate  viii); 
The  Railway  (Plate  x);  Ball  at  the  Opera;  Boating;  Grand  Canal,  Venice  — M.  G.  Van- 
derbilt: The  Tragic  Actor;  Rest  (Plate  vi)  — Philadelphia,  J.  Johnson:  Combat  of 
the  Kearsage  and  the  Alabama  — M.  Widener:  Dead  Toreador. 


A list  of  the  principal  books  and  magazine  articles 
dealing  with  MANET 

;^EXANDRE,  A.  Histoire  populaire  de  la  peinture.  ficole  Fran9aise.  Paris,  1893 


— Bazire,  E.  Manet.  Paris,  1884  — Beckwith,  J.  C.  (in  Modern  French  Mas- 
ters, edited  by  J.  C.  Van  Dyke).  New  York,  1896  — Biez,  J.  de.  fidouard  Manet. 
Paris,  1884  — Brownell,  W.  C.  French  Art.  New  York,  1901 — Bryan,  M.  Dic- 
tionary of  Painters  and  Engravers.  London,  1895 — Caffin,  C.  H.  How  to  Study  Pic- 
tures. New  York,  1906  — Catalogue  de  P exposition  des  oeuvres  de  Manet,  avec 
preface  d’ Emile  Zola.  Paris,  1884  — Catalogue  de  1’ Exposition  de  24  tableaux  et 
aquarelles,  formant  la  Collection  Faure.  Paris,  1906  — Dewhurst,  W.  Impressionist 
Painting.  London,  1904  — Duret,  T.  Critique  d’ Avantgarde.  Paris,  1885. — 
Duret,  T.  Histoire  d’Edouard  Manet  et  de  son  oeuvre.  Paris,  1902  — Encyclopedia  Bri- 
tannica.  Edinburgh,  1902  — Geffroy,  G.  La  Vie  artistique.  Paris,  1893  — Gonse,  L. 
Edouard  Manet.  Paris,  1884  — Kingsley,  R.  G.  A History  of  French  Art.  London, 
1899  — Lecomte,  G.  L’Art  impressioniste.  Paris,  1892  — Mach,  E.  von.  Outlines 
of  the  History  of  Painting.  Boston,  1905  — Mauclair,  C.  The  French  Impressionists: 
Translated  by  P.  G.  Konody.  Paris,  1902 — Mauclair,  C.  The  Great  French 
Painters  from  1830  to  the  Present  Day.  Translated  by  P.  G.  Konody.  Paris,  1903 — 
Meier-Gr.®fe,  J.  Impressionisten.  Munich,  1907  — Meier-Gr.®fe,  J.  Manet  und 
sein  Kreis  (Die  Kunst  Sammlung  illustrierter  Monographien).  Berlin,  1902  — 
Moore,  G.  Modern  Painting.  London,  1903  — Moreau-Nelaton,  E.  Manet  graveur 
et  lithographe.  Paris,  1906 — Muther,  R.  The  History  of  Modern  Painting.  London, 
1895 — Muther,  R.  Ein  Jahrhundert  der  franzosicher  Malerie.  Berlin,  1901 — Rein- 
ACH,  S.  Apollo,  anillustrated  Manual  of  Art  throughout  the  Ages.  London,  1907  — 
Stranahan,  C.  H.  a History  of  French  Painting.  New  York,  1895  — Tschudi, 
Hugo  von.  Edouard  Manet.  Berlin,  1902  — Van  Dyke,  J.  C.  A History  of  Art, 
New  York,  1899 — Wolff,  A.  La  Capitale  de  PArt.  Paris,  1886  — Zola,  fi.  Manet. 
Paris,  1867  — Zola,  E.  Mes  Haines.  Paris,  1878. 


^CADEMY,  1903:  Anonymous;  Edouard  Manet — Art  Journal,  1884:  N.  Gar- 
stein;  Edouard  Manet.  1895:  C.  Mauclair;  Edouard  Manet — Athen.*;um,  1906: 
Anonymous;  Paintings  of  fedouard  Manet  in  the  Faure  Collection  — Brush  and  Pencil, 
1898:  A.  J.  Eddy;  Edouard  Manet.  1905:  F.  Wedmore;  E.  Manet,  Edgar  Degas  and 
P.  A.  Renoir,  Impressionist  Figure  Painters.  1907:  C.  Mauclair  and  A.  J.  Eddy;  Two 
Appreciations  of  Manet. — -Contemporary  Review,  1907:  A.  P.  Nicholson;  Manet 
and  Monet  — Gazette  des  Beaux-Arts,  1884:  L.  Gonse;  Manet.  1902:  R.  Marx; 
Review  of  M.  T.  Duret’s  Monograph  oh  Manet  — National,  1884:  A.  Baigneres; 
Edouard  Manet  and  the  French  Impressionist  School  — Saturday  Review,  1896: 
Anonymous;  Paintings  of  Edouard  Manet  — Scribner,  1894:  P.  G.  Hamerton;  The 
Fifer  by  Manet.  1906:  G.  Moore;  Reminiscences  of  the  Impressionist  Painters  — 
Studio,  1901:  A.  Proust;  Art  of  Manet.  1903:  W.  Dewhurst;  Impressionist  Painting; 
Its  Genesis  and  Development.  1904:  Manet's  Portrait  by  F.  Bracquemond  — Zeit- 
SCHRIFT  FUR  Bildende  Kunst,  1 903  : F.  Laban;  Im  swanzigsten  Jahr  nach  Manets  Tode. 


magazine  articles 


[42] 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


F.  W.  Devoe  & Co/s  Artists’  Tube  Colors 

ARE  THE  STANDARD  QUALITY 

Used  by  all  prominent  artists  and  sold  by  all  first-class  dealers 
Also  BRUSHES  and  other  ARTISTS’  MATERIALS 


F.  W.  DEVOE  & C.  T.  RAYNOLDS’  CO.> 

NEW  YORK  CHICAGO  KANSAS  CITY 


Under 

Ordinary  Conditions 

of 

Lighting 

the  pictures  in  a room  are  never 
to  be  seen  to  advantage.  If  you 
do  not  care  to  place  a permanent 
fixture  over  each  painting,  why 
not  secure  one  of  our  portable 
reflectors  ? Y ou  can  move  it  any- 
where, direct  the  light  as  you 
please.  The  arrangement  of  re- 
flecting surfaces  concentrates  all 
the  power  of  the  electric  lamp 
on  any  one  picture.  This  is  the 
cheapest  method  of  effective 

Picture  Lighting 

I.  P.  FRINK 
551  Pearl  Street,  New  York 


BRAUN’S 

CARBON 

PRINTS 


FINEST  AND  MOST  DURABLE 
IMPORTED  WORKS  OF  ART 


^NE  HUNDRED  THOUSAND  direct 
'^reproductions  from  the  original  paintings 
and  drawings  by  old  and  modern  masters  in  the 
galleries  of  Amsterdam,  Antwerp,  Berlin,  Dres- 
den, Florence,  Haarlem,  Hague,  London,  Ma- 
drid, Milan,  Paris,  St.  Petersburg,  Rome, 
Venice,  Vienna,  Windsor,  and  others. 

Special  Terms  to  Schools. 


BRAUN,  CLEMENT  & CO. 

256  Fifth  Ave.,  bet.  28th  and  29th  Sts. 
NEW  YORK  CITY 


Reproductions  of  Masterpieces 

IN  MASTERPIECES  OF  REPRODUCTION 

The  greatest  selection  and  largest  variety  will  be  found  in  our 
catalogue,  containing  400  illustrations  of  the  most  famous  pictures 
— both  ancient  and  modern. 

A copy  of  this  reference-book,  indispensable  to  all  lovers  of  art,  with 
comments  by  competent  critics,  biographical  notes,  suggestions  for 
decorating  homes,  schools,  etc.,  will  be  sent  on  receipt  of  50c.,  which 
amount  will  be  reimbursed  on  receipt  of  initial  order. 

Art  Schools,  Libraries,  and  other  educational  institutions, 
making  application  on  their  printed  letter-heads  and  enclosing  20c.  in 
stamps  to  defray  packing  and  forwarding  expenses,  will  receive  a copy 
free. 

BERLIN  PHOTOGRAPHIC  COMPANY 

14  East  23d  Street  (Madison  Square  South)  New  York 
A visit  to  our  Show-rooms  is  respectfully  requested. 


In  answering  advertisements,  please  mention  Masters  in  Art 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


iHa0ttrs  in  ^rt  iFramms  ^rtnt0 


N this  and  the  page  following  we  publish  a few  of  the  several  hundred 
letters  received  from  those  who  have  purchased  our  Framing  Prints. 
These  letters  are  not  selected.  They  are  taken  just  as  they  came, 
without  any  attempt  to  pick  those  which  are  most  commendatory.  Full 
information  concerning  these  prints  will  be  found  in  preceding  issues,  or  we 
shall  be  pleased  to  mail  an  illustrated  list  of  them  on  request. 

BATES  & GUILD  CO.,  42  CHAUNCY  STREET,  BOSTON,  MASS. 


“It  was  certainly  worth  while  waiting  for 
them,  as  they  are  unusually  beautiful  prints.” — 
Elsie  R.  Kane,  662  Tenth  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

“We  are  very  much  pleased  with  them. 
Think  they  compare  very  favorably  with  many 
higher  priced  prints,  and  shall  be  glad  to  know 
if  you  add  other  subjects  to  the  series.”  — Sarah 
W.  Paul,  Kent  Place,  Summit,  N.  J. 

“I  must  confess  that  the  quality  of  the  repro- 
ductions has  considerably  exceeded  my  expec- 
tations.”— H.  Robbins,  no  West  45th  St., 
New  York,  N.  Y. 

“The  set  of  Framing  Prints  which  I received 
from  you  this  week  have  more  than  fulfilled  my 
expectations.” — Mrs.  Daisy  Lee  Smith,  124 
College  St.,  Bufialo,  N.  Y. 

“The  set  of  Framing  Prints  have  been  re- 
ceived and  we  think  them  very  commendable.” 
— Mrs.  H.  F.  Stone,  2 Chestnut  St.,  Engle- 
wood, N.  J. 

“I  have  the  set  of  Framing  Prints  and  think 
that  they  are  satisfactory  reproductions  and 
ought  to  be  approved  as  valuable  and  interest- 
ing.”— John  H.  Converse,  Baldwin  Locomo- 
tive Works,  Philadelphia,  Penn. 

“It  is  with  great  pleasure  that  I express  my 
unqualified  approval  of  them.  They  are  far 
more  beautiful  in  their  treatment  than  I had 
anticipated,  and  I am  very  glad  that  the  oppor- 
tunity was  given  me  to  possess  them.” — G.  D. 
Terry,  131  N.  Mountain  Ave.,  Montclair,  N.  J. 

“I  have  received  the  ten  Framing  Prints,  and 
beg  to  express  my  great  satisfaction  with  them. 

“They  may  be  inferior  to  Braun  prints  in 
subtle  values,  but  so  are  they  in  cost!  And  taking 
everything  into  consideration,  I highly  commend 
your  enterprise,  and  trust  you  may  favorably 
consider  further  additions  to  the  series;  and  for 
myself,  trust  I may  be  able  to  share  in  their  dis- 
tribution. 

“Thanking  you  for  the  opportunity  of  sharing 
in  these  beautiful  prints.” — Elmer  E.  Garnsey, 
White  Plains,  N.  Y. 


“ Permit  me  to  congratulate  you  on  success  of 
your  experiment,  as  far  as  the  reproduction  is 
concerned;  the  Raphael,  Titian,  and  Da  Vinci 
are  remarkably  fine,  equal  to  carbons,  almost!” 
— E.  J.  Mead,  57  Broad  St.,  Stamford,  Conn. 

“The  set  of  Framing  Prints  have  given  me 
eminent  satisfaction.  Both  the  process  and  its 
execution  leave  nothing  to  be  desired.” — 
George  L.  Cary,  Meadville  Theological  School, 
Meadville,  Penn. 

“The  prints  are  superb,  arid  I thank  you  for 
the  pleasure  they  will  always  give  me.” — Sarah 
E.  Rogers,  1776  Beacon  St.,  Boston,  Mass. 

“I  am  much  pleased  with  the  pictures  and 
hope  the  public  will  show  its  appreciation  of 
them  in  such  a way  as  will  warrant  you  in  adding 
others  to  the  set.” — F.  H.  Schofield,  Collegiate 
Instriute,  Winnipeg,  Man. 

“The  cost  of  the  series  is  in  no  way  an  indica- 
tion of  its  value  or  the  excellence  of  the  repro- 
ductions, and  I feel  that  you  are  to  be  com- 
mended for  your  enterprise  in  connection  with 
the  publication  of  these  masterpieces  at  so  rea- 
sonable a price.” — Theodore  Irving  Coe,  too 
William  St.,  New  York,  N,  Y. 

“I  am  delighted  with  them.  I think  I have 
never  seen  a better  print  of  the  ‘ Sistine  Madonna ; ’ 
and  with  the  exception  of  the  ‘Fighting  Teme- 
raire,’  which  seems  just  a trifle  pale  to  me,  they 
all  seem  equally  good.  I consider  my  subscrip- 
tion a genuine  bargain,  and  will  look  forward  to 
hear  whether  you  may  add  other  pictures  to  the 
collection.”  — Alice  Kurtz  Whiteman,  St. 
James  Rectory,  Greenfield,  Mass. 

“The  reproductions  are  very  pleasing  and  are 
more  satisfactory  to  me  than  the  same  picture  in 
a photograph.  Photographs  have  such  an  annoy- 
i ng  way  of  curling  up,  whereas  these  prints  can 
be  placed  in  a portfolio  instead  of  framing,  to  be 
consulted  when  wanted. 

“The  idea  is  an  excellent  one,  and  I shall  look 
forward  to  more  of  the  same  sort.” — Edwin  H. 
Hewitt,  716  4th  Ave.  So.,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


“ We  are  all  charmed  with  the  beauty  of  your 
ten  large  reproductions  of  masterpieces  of  paint- 
ing. The  ‘Mona  Lisa’  is  the  best  reproduction 
I have  ever  seen,  and  Botticelli’s  ‘Allegory  of 
Spring’  is  also  particularly  fine. 

“The  pictures  will  be  received  with  enthusi- 
asm by  the  art  lovers  of  this  community,  and  we 
hope  you  will  publish  a great  many  more  of 
them.” — Flora  L.  Terry,  12  So.  Cliff  St., 
Ansonia,  Conn. 

“The  prints  received  this  morning.  I am 
more  than  pleased  with  them.  Kindly  let  me 
know  when  you  print  any  other  subjects  and  let 
me  have  list.” — L.  M.  Peters,  3312  Walnut 
St.,  Philadelphia,  Penn. 

“I  received  the  photograph  of  the  ‘Sistine 
Madonna’  and  it  is  very  satisfactory.  It  is  a 
very  good  print,  I will  say  as  good  as  one  I 
bought  in  Dresden  a few  years  ago.”  — Mrs. 
Elizabeth  Page  Thomas,  12  Arnold  Park, 
Rochester,  N.  Y. 

“I  am  much  pleased  with  the  Framing  Prints. 
They  are  very  beautiful  and  most  satisfactory, 
and  I should  be  glad  to  have  others  added  to  the 
series.” — Mrs.  L.  F.  Brigham,  Chestnut  Hill, 
Mass. 

“I  have  shown  them  to  several  people  and 
they  too  have  admired  them.  Most  of  them  t 
am  going  to  have  framed,  and  they  will  be  a great 
addition  to  our  home. 

“If  you  have  any  more  prints  made,  please  let 
me  know.” — Mildred  Fisher,  Sayreville, 
N.  J. 

“I  had  intended  writing  you  long  ago  of  the 
safe  arrival  of  the  Framing  Prints,  with  which  I 
am  very  much  delighted. 

“My  friends,  to  whom  I have  shown  them, 
think  they  are  perfect  gems  and  a pleasure  to 
possess  them.” — Flora  M.  Schmidt,  3423 
Oakwood  Terrace,  Mt.  Pleasant,  Washing- 
ton, D.  C. 

“I  find  the  Framing  Prints  most  satisfactory. 
The  process  seems  to  me  to  be  very  successful. 
All  the  delicate  gradations  of  tone,  the  texture 
of  canvas  and  materials,  the  technic  of  the 
artist,  which  constitute  so  great  a part  in  the 
charm  of  works  by  the  ancient  and  modern 
masters,  are  rendered  with  remarkable  faithful- 
ness.”— Herbert  W.  Hill,  20  Montrose  St., 
Boston,  Mass. 

“The  set  of  Framing  Prints  came  in  splendid 
condition  and  I am  more  than  pleased  with 
them.  The  work  seems  by  far  better  than  any  I 
have  ever  seen  in  this  country.” — Alice  J. 
Newcomb,  Ancho,  N.  M. 

“The  set  of  Framing  Prints  have  been  de- 
livered to  me  in  good  condition.  Both  in  their 
selection  and  their  reproduction,  the  prints  are 
excellent.” — John  Galen  Howard,  604  Mis- 
sion St.,  San  Francisco,  Cal. 


“A  superficial  examination  indicates  them  to 
be  most  excellent  prints  and  certainly  better 
than  anything  of  the  kind  I have  before  seen.” — 
John  Calvin  Stevens,  Oxford  Building,  Port- 
land, Me. 

“I  think  that,  considering  the  price  charged, 
these  are  wonderfully  good  reproductions.” — 
Thomas  R.  Hughes,  Room  914,  66  Beaver  St., 
New  York  City. 

“Those  that  you  sent  me  are  beautiful  in 
every  sense  — a genuine  acquisition  for  one  — 
both  in  beauty  of  tone  and  clear  impression.” — 
Frederic  C.  Martin,  1168  Mulberry  St., 
Harrisburg,  Penn. 

“We  are  all  much  pleased,  as  a family,  with 
the  reproductions  and  are  more  interested  than 
otherwise  would  be,  because  we  have  seen  most 
of  the  originals  in  Europe.” — Mrs.  J.  O.  Yate- 
MAN,  253  Knight  St.,  Providence,  R.  I. 

“The  pictures  came  Tuesday  and  are  most 
lovely.  We  have  feasted  on  them  many  times 
since,  and  it’s  being  truly  generous  to  give  one 
away;  but  four  have  gone  to  their  destinations, 
and  have  been  fully  appreciated.  The  wonder 
grows  upon  us  how  you  can  afford  to  do  it  at  that 
price.” — Lizzie  E.  Morse,  North  Easton,  Mass. 

“They  seem  to  me  in  every  way  admirable, 
and  I am  delighted  to  possess  them.  Will  be 
pleased  to  know  what  additional  subjects  will 
be  made  to  the  series.” — Mrs.  Alta  M.  Eves, 
630  South  Howes  St.,  Fort  Collins,  Col. 

“ It  seems  to  me  extra  good  value  for  the 
money,  and  I am  well  satisfied.” — J.  D.  Ste- 
phens, Swan  River,  Man. 

“I  am  very  much  pleased  with  the  Framing 
Prints,  which  arrived  in  good  condition  last 
week.” — M.  C.  Macartney,  511  Laurel  St., 
Bellingham,  Wash. 

“I  am  very  much  pleased  with  them,  they  are 
gotten  up  in  such  a beautiful  style.”  — Kate 
Hardy,  415  Stockley  Gardens,  Norfolk,  Va. 

“The  Framing  Prints  even  exceeded  my  ex- 
pectation and  I am  delighted  with  them.” — 
Gertrude  Heath,  274  Quincy  St.,  Brooklyn, 
N.  Y. 

“I  desire  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  set 
of  Framing  Prints  and  to  express  my  admira- 
tion and  satisfaction  for  the  same.” — Ada  C. 
Walker,  423  State  St.,  Albany,  N.  Y. 

“I  am  very  much  pleased  with  the  prints, 
which  arrived  in  perfect  condition.  They  are 
exquisite  and  fully  equal,  if  not  superior,  in  tone 
and  expression  to  the  most  expensive  photo- 
graphs. Every  one  of  them  is  worthy  a good 
frame,  and  it  would  be  evidence  of  a person’s 
good  taste  if  they  hung  on  his  walls.” — Thomas 
A.  Watson,  East  Braintree,  Mass. 


MASTERS  IN  ART 


ifttasters  in  for  1908 

will  be  published  on  the  same  plan  and  up  to  the  same  high  stand- 
ard in  every  respect  which  has  characterized  the  preceding  years 
of  the  publication.  The  artists  to  whose  work  it  has  been  definitely 
decided  to  devote  numbers  are  as  follows:  — 

SIR  FREDERICK  LEIGHTON 

who  was  for  nearly  twenty  years  the  President  of  the  Royal 
Academy.  He  is  noted  for  his  sumptuous  color  and  the 
graceful,  statuesque  pose  of  his  figures. 

EDOUARD  MANET 

the  leader  of  the  Impressionist  School  in  France  for  many 
years.  He  used  this  manner  of  painting  in  the  portrayal  of 
figure  studies  and  nudes. 

NICHOLAS  MAES 

the  pupil  of  Rembrandt,  and  one  of  the  best  painters  of 
genre.  His  simple,  family  scenes  of  peasant  life  have  almost 
a modern  look. 

CARLO  CRIVELLI 

Almost  an  anachronism  in  fifteenth-century  Venice.  His 
pictures  glow  like  old  mosaics  with  every  accessory  of  deco- 
ration. 

DOMENICO  THEOTOCOPULl 

that  strange  and  little  understood  painter  called  El  Greco  (The 
Greek),  who  migrated  to  Spain  and  painted  those  almost  sav- 
age pictures  with  sacred  themes,  and  weird,  forceful  porrtraits. 

PARIS  BORDONE 

A follower  of  Titian,  “who,”  John  Addington  Symonds  re- 
marks, “mingled  on  his  canvas  cream  and  mulberry  juice  and 
sunbeams.” 


^ufi^Scription,  $U50,  in  aUfiance 

If  subscribers,  when  renewing,  will  remit  by  Postal  or  Express  Money  Order,  it  will  be 
appreciated  by  the  publishers,  who  have  to  pay  collection  charges  on  checks  drawn  on  banks 
outside  of  Boston,  New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  Chicago. 


In  answering  advertisements,  please  mention  Masters  in  Art 


6 5 4 43 


GEHY  CENTER  LIBRARY  MAIN 

NO  553  yi6  U27  BKS 

C.  1 

Manet 


3 3125  00306  7531 


